Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

The Veepstakes Line: The Only Constant is Change

One of the most fascinating elements of the vice presidential sweepstakes -- veepstakes for those of us in the know -- is its changeability.

Names rise and names fall; some potential veeps get hot at the right time while others go cold.

The last time The Fix ranked the five most likely vice presidential picks for Barack Obama, the top two picks were Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland and Virginia Sen. Jim Webb.

VP Watch

Days later Strickland removed himself from consideration; Webb followed suit less than a week ago. (For what it's worth, former Virginia Gov. Mark Warner, regarded by many as a darkhorse favorite for veep, took himself out of the running recently as well.)

The lesson? Making hard and fast predictions about politics is a fool's errand. That's not to say, however, that we won't keep reporting and analyzing the veepstakes until the moment a decision is made but rather that everything anyone reports about vice presidential politics should be taken cum grano salis.

Our conscience clean, we turn to this month's Line. With the two top candidates on the Democratic side (at least by The Fix's analysis) out of the running, we have a new number one in the race to be vice president. And, not to be outdone, a new number one has emerged on the Republican side as well.

Scroll down for the new top contenders. And remember that the Line is meant as a conversation starter so feel free to use the comments section below to offer your kudos and criticisms.

To the Line!

REPUBLICANS

John Thune
Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) (AP Photo/Doug Dreyer)

5. John Thune: The South Dakota senator is playing the tortoise in the veepstakes, content to hang in the back of the pack until the final decision days. In an interview with a South Dakota television station, Thune played that part to the hilt "I don't have, as I said before, any intentions on that job. And I don't expect to be asked." We still think Thune will be a veepstakes finalist, however, because of his age (he's 47), his strong support for McCain during the rollercoaster candidacy of the past year and his ability to appeal to social and fiscal conservatives. The biggest drawback for Thune? With no Senator having been directly elected to the White House in 48 years, does McCain really want to double down on his Washington ties given that Congress is as popular as used car salesman at the moment? (Previous ranking: 3)

Bobby Jindal
Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal (R) (Mark Wilson/Getty Images)

4. Bobby Jindal: It's hard to get Republican political operatives excited about anything these days. The toxic national environment has put them on defense in the battle for control of the House and the Senate and few feel terribly optimistic about McCain's chances either. And yet, bring up Jindal's name and faces brighten. Jindal, an Indian American elected governor of Louisiana last year, is widely seen as rising star in a party desperate for someone to attach its star to. Picking Jindal, who is 37 years old, complicates McCain's attempts to paint Obama as too young and inexperienced to be president. And, it's more likely that Jindal will wind up on a national ticket in four or eight years. But, for a party badly in need of an energy transfusion, Jindal could be just what the doctor ordered. (Previous ranking: N/A)

3. Tom Ridge: Ridge, who spent twelve years in Congress and eight years as Pennsylvania's governor, makes his debut on the veepstakes Line for two critical reasons: his relationship with McCain and his military/national security credentials. McCain, more so than almost any politician we can think of, prioritizes personal relationships -- and he and Ridge are extremely close. (Both men served in Vietnam and were elected to Congress in 1982.) And, Ridge strengthens McCain's already strong hand on national security matters, having been the former (and first) head of the Department of Homeland Security. The argument against Ridge is that he favors abortion rights and would anger the Republican base if picked. But since when has McCain worried about that? (Previous ranking: N/A)

2. Tim Pawlenty: For the first time since we unveiled the vice presidential Line, T-Paw falls from the top spot. The buzz factor around Pawlenty has quieted quite a bit over the last month as the chattering class moves on to a new flavor of the month. Although Pawlenty isn't ranked number one today, it's hard to imagine that he is not one of the final three (or four) people that McCain considers. Pawlenty's compelling personal story (the son of a truck driver), appeal in a potential swing state and close relationship with McCain are all powerful factors in his favor. (Previous ranking: 1)

Mitt Romney
Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney (R) (AP File Photo)

1. Mitt Romney: When Romney dropped out of the presidential race this spring, The Fix was one of the many political prognosticators who said that McCain would NEVER choose the former governor as his running mate. The two simply didn't like each other as was readily apparent during the course of the contest. And yet, here Romney sits in the pole position less than two months before McCain will make his pick. Why? The economy is shaping up to be the whole ball game in the fall and McCain badly needs to build his bona fides on the issue quickly. The best way to do that is to choose the uber-successful Romney. Will McCain and Romney ever be best friends or even personally close? No way. But we have two names for you: Lyndon Johnson (in 1960) and George H.W. Bush (in 1980). Both men were picked to be vice president despite an adversarial relationship with the presidential nominee. (Previous ranking: 2)

DEMOCRATS

5. Hillary Rodham Clinton: The healing between the Clinton and Obama camps isn't going as smoothly as some had expected. That comes as no surprise to anyone (like The Fix) who was there toward the end of the primary process when it became clear the depth of the hurt feelings and perceived slights among the supporters of both candidates. Still, picking Clinton could go along way to solving Obama's potential problems among women and in the Rust Belt. But, as we argued in the case against Clinton for vice president, naming Clinton means putting her and the former president on the ballot -- a risk Obama may not be willing to take. (Previous ranking: 5)

4. Joe Biden: Say what you will about Joe Biden (and believe us, we have heard it all), it's hard to argue that the guy doesn't know his stuff -- particularly when it comes to foreign policy. Biden is also, in his own way, a charismatic figure on the campaign trail who won lots of admirers -- if not many votes -- during his own short-lived presidential bid. If Obama believes that voters want a steady hand and a known commodity at his side, Biden looks like the pick of the litter. Of course, Biden's penchant for speaking off the cuff has fouled up more than one of his campaigns and he would need to be kept on a very tight leash if he was picked. (Previous ranking: N/A)

Kathleen Sebelius
Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

3. Kathleen Sebelius: Eyebrows were raised (in a good way) when Obama heaped praise on Sebelius during an interview with a Kansas City television station late last month. "I love Kathleen Sebelius," Obama said. "I think she is as talented a public official as there is right now." High praise indeed. The biggest knock against Sebelius is that Obama can't pick a woman as his vice president whose last name isn't "Clinton." Maybe, but our sense is that bit of conventional wisdom overstates significantly what Obama and those close to him believe they "owe" the Clintons. (Previous ranking: 3)

2. Evan Bayh: Ask a political operative to name the first word that comes to mind when he or she thinks of Evan Bayh and the usual response is "boring." While that characterization isn't entirely fair to Bayh -- we have met and interviewed him a number of times and found him surprisingly engaging if a bit cautious -- it could also be seen as the highest praise possible in terms of picking a vice president. It's hard to see Bayh making a major mistake on the campaign trail or drawing tons of unwanted attention to the ticket. And, on the plus side, he is a former two term governor of Indiana (a state Obama believes he can win) and a past supporter of Clinton, making his selection something of a symbolic olive branch to allies of the New York Senator. Did we mention Bayh is well versed on foreign policy matters thanks to his decade in the Senate? Make no mistake: Bayh is the real deal in the veepstakes. (Previous ranking: N/A)

Tim Kaine
Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine (AP Photo/Richmond Times-Dispatch, Eva Russo)

1. Tim Kaine: When we put together the cases for and against potential vice presidential picks, it's usually much easier to find people willing to point out the foibles of a candidate rather than his or her strengths. Not so with Kaine, who drew praise across the political spectrum as a skilled politician and intriguing potential pick for Obama. The Kaine case is straightforward and strong: he was among the first elected officials in the country to endorse Obama (way back in February 2007), the two men share similar backgrounds (both have roots in Kansas, both attended Harvard Law School) and Kaine is a popular politician in a state that is emerging as a central battleground in the fall election. It's 100 percent true that picking Kaine would do little to sure up voter doubts about Obama's readiness on national security and foreign policy matters. But, don't be so sure the Obama campaign thinks they have to protect that flank as carefully as conventional wisdom suggests they do. (Previous ranking: N/A)

By Chris Cillizza  |  July 11, 2008; 7:03 AM ET
Categories:  The Line , Veepstakes  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: John McCain's Economic Narrative Problem
Next: Defining the House Playing Field

Comments

The most obvious choice for McCain is Romney - since this election is largely about the economy. Romney has the chops in this area. However, this VeeP choice may well be too rational and McCain will likely end up choosing a less high profile running mate.

Posted by: jkjohnson2 | July 30, 2008 5:55 PM | Report abuse

I assume that McCain's vetters will at least talk to the candidates. If so, that will be the end of Palin. Cute as a bug and dumb as a post. The VP debate would be humiliating. And she's about to be investigated for using her office to try to get her ex-brother-in-law fired. It's sad that the GOP has such a lack of credible candidates.

Posted by: PJ | July 28, 2008 11:40 PM | Report abuse

I think Obama will announce before he goes over seas and Biden will fight here on the domestic front while he is overseas.

then the convention will happen...McCain will announce...

and then Obama will announce Edwards as the AG...the day of or right after McCain's announcement. and that he will be reforming the AG's office.

then Hillary or Richardson (if he was smart it would be Hillary - and she might take it to shore up more foreign policy cred and for nothing else to make sure Richardson doesn't get it) as secretary of state.

If they are playing chess...that's what they will do.

Posted by: dl | July 16, 2008 10:03 AM | Report abuse

One more time...it's going to be Biden.

I have said this for months now...there is no better choice...whether he sticks his foot in his mouth or not...

It has been obvious for months on almost every factor you pick a vp on.

I know everyone has their favorites but Biden has always been the best 2nd for Obama sheerly on the math.

Posted by: dl | July 16, 2008 9:59 AM | Report abuse

"Yesterday's enemy is Today's best Friend."
(Japanese saying!)

We love Mitt Romney as VP!

M & M Ticket we support!
Mitt for President 2012

Posted by: Sunshine! | July 15, 2008 1:13 PM | Report abuse

Chuck Schumer would be a great VP for Obama. He is knowledgeable on all issues. Being Jewish firms up the Jewish vote which helps bring in Florida and there is no better attack dog in the Democratic Party than Chuck Schumer. He would make mince meat of McCain.

McCain should bring in Bob Dole as his VP, standing next to him would make McCain look younger. The Grumpy Old Men ticket.

Posted by: Scott | July 15, 2008 12:19 AM | Report abuse

what happened to Bill Richardson? why has his stock fallen so low that he doesn't merit a mention on anyone's list?

Posted by: Brian in Boston | July 14, 2008 1:27 PM | Report abuse

Dexter, I would bet the field against the HRC - Rendell entry.

I would bet other "entries" against yours. I am not yet prepared to bet on an individual candidate.
----------------------------------
Are you insulted when I refer to Texans of Mexican heritage as either "Chicano/a", "Tejano/a", or TXMX? I do it to avoid the antipathy I feel to the terms 'latino" and "hispanic" to ID very different subcultures as if they were merely a single linguistic grouping. I do not intend to demean.

For example:

I have tried to explain here that the TXMX vote is in no way monolithic, and except for the newest Texans, conducts business and politics in English. It helps to have a Spanish family name, but not to advertise on Spanish language stations, for the most part, if you are a candidate in most of TX.

Posted by: MarkInAustin | July 14, 2008 8:43 AM | Report abuse

McCaskill isn't going to happen for BHO.

From The Hill:
Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.)
"If I were asked, I would ask some mental health professionals to visit Barack Obama. I just think Sen. Obama is way too smart to pick me. I'm not a good pick, and he's smarter than that. That's why he's going to make such a good president."

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/senators-say-whether-theyd-agree-to-be-vice-president-2008-05-12.html

Posted by: mnteng | July 14, 2008 7:20 AM | Report abuse

Here's a dark horse for you. How about Senator Patti Murray from WA state? This is why: She voted against the war authorization to invade Iraq, She's catholic, been in the senate since 1992 - ran as an ousider against a big name guy. She ran as "a mom in tennis shoes" She voted no recently on FISA.
Downside, some 2002 inflammatory remarks about Osama bin Laden.
Anybody?

Posted by: Clothilde | July 14, 2008 6:48 AM | Report abuse

Several weeks ago I predicted Bayh as not only Obama's pick for VP but *the next* VP. (Obviously I'm predicting Obama to win) Every election I make predictions based on astrology. Yes I know, astrology is just nonsense -- except the funny thing is, I'm usally right! (You'll see!)

http://lisaspoliticalpredictions.blogspot.com/

Posted by: Lisa Jean M | July 14, 2008 5:10 AM | Report abuse

Fairfax voter:
Brillant post. I'll go along with you on McCaskill, Kaine and Bayh, but is there a reason you don't see Biden?

Posted by: Sunshine | July 13, 2008 11:39 PM | Report abuse

CC, the Guardian makes a good case for Governor Sarah Palin as VP for McCain:

"Another possible female pick for McCain is Alaska governor Sarah Palin. She is the darling of the conservative wing of the Republican party, which McCain is seen as needing to bolster. Once a beauty queen in her home town of Wasilla, she has gone on to carve out an impressive career in the rough and tumble of Alaskan politics, earning a political image as a tough woman, famed for riding snowmobiles and eating moose burgers. She is also a lifetime member of the National Rifle Association and has had five children. The political gossip blog Wonkette once dubbed her 'America's hottest governor'. Given McCain's age and crusty persona, a glamorous, dynamic female running-mate such as Palin would be a presentational bonus."

Posted by: Johnny Mac (Sydney) | July 13, 2008 7:36 PM | Report abuse

Obama himself has said he is a Rorschach test and my own answer to the test (that is, what I see when I look at him) is that he's our Ronald Reagan -- a transformative, broadly popular president with fantastic communication skills, clear goals for his time in office, and a winning, sunny personality. (Of course I know some people hate him. Same with Reagan. But in each case, more people like him.)

Who did Ronald Reagan pick? George W. Bush. I realize this had to do with Bush having run against him. But think just about the ticket itself. It was fabulous. A true "star" (literally a product of the Hollywood studio system) paired with a supporting player who provided genuine, valuable Washington insider AND foreign policy expertise, AND was undeniably ready to be president, but had all the scene-stealing capacity of a well-made living-room sofa.

Does anyone here think that describes Hillary Clinton or her spouse? They are huge stars in their own right, not second bananas. By the Reagan-Bush ticket standard, Bayh (or possibly Kaine) sounds like the right choice, of those you mention in the "line."

Tell me again, though, why not Claire McCaskill? She's been such a strong, supportive presence throughout the primaries and is so good at making a case for Obama. I always stop channel-surfing to hear what she has to say. I also have a Republican friend (a senior citizen and veteran) who is a huge fan of hers because of her work at the state level in Missouri before coming to the Senate. He sees her as the political heir of fellow Missourian Harry Truman on government waste and abuse and contractor fraud, as far as I can tell.

Posted by: Fairfax Voter | July 13, 2008 6:48 PM | Report abuse

Chris and everybody else: Just cut the crap and lick the knife.

What price will you lay me on the entry of HRC and Ed Rendell for Obama VP choice?

Put up or shut up.

Posted by: DexterManley | July 13, 2008 5:33 PM | Report abuse

Final report: What I believe to be BO's (revised) long list for veep (in order of preference) is largely unchanged at the top. The bottom, though, has shown some movement; in particular HRC has moved up. See below.

1. Tim Kaine
2. Claire McCaskill
* * * * * * *
301,139,937 Denise Rich
301,139,938 Carl Weathers (recommended by J. Ventura and A.S.)
301,139,939. Mrs. H.R. Clinton
301,139,940. Richard Speck (availability unclear)
301,139,941. Marc Rich (selecting him would finally return him to US jurisdiction))
301,139,942. Mark Foley (would give us strong bipartisan appeal; has disturbing constituency, however)
301,139,943. Rosie
301,139,944. K. Sebelius (youth concerns earlier noted by many)
301,139,945. Estelle Getty
301,139,946. Kwame Kilpatrick
301,139,947. Stephen Baldwin (have staff check whether he has done anything since "Posse")

Posted by: Broadway Joe | July 13, 2008 12:44 PM | Report abuse

Is John Edwards a definite 'no'?

Posted by: mahmud010 | July 13, 2008 11:43 AM | Report abuse

For VP:
Tim Kaine
Wesley Clark
Patti Solis Doyle

Posted by: America's Promise | July 13, 2008 10:22 AM | Report abuse

The sane pick is obviously Hillary Clinton, but why in hell would Democrats do the sane thing all of the sudden?

The fact that Democrats think Bill Clinton has too much "baggage" while Republicans are working their asses off to get Ronald Reagan cut into Mt. Rushmore tells you everything you need to know.

Posted by: Jan | July 13, 2008 7:04 AM | Report abuse

At this point in the veepstakes it more about the demographics than anything else. Who can deliver their respective states in the fall to make it easier for Barack Obama to reach 270. Tim Kaine and Evan Bayh are the best case scenarios, both popular and can deliver their states. Kathleen Sebelius is a rock-star to me personally, but she does not deliver Kansas. She could influence the vote in Ohio since her father was governor of the state. In addition to that she could increase the women vote, but as a blogger mentioned earlier it would be a slap in Hillary Clinton's face if she was pasted over by another women.

At this point im leaning Obama/Bayh 52%-48% over Obama/Kaine

Posted by: Clifton | July 13, 2008 1:47 AM | Report abuse

Does Obama really need a VP? His ego is so big, there may be no room for a partner in crime.

Besides, he still may be on his world tour - visiting high profile places and giving speeches - like the balcony of the Buckingham Palace and from the Queen's throne in the Houses of Parliment.

Heck, forget about America. OBAMA for WORLD LEADER!! We'll have no more wars, just speeches!

That may solve all of our problems!

Posted by: Lucy | July 12, 2008 11:23 PM | Report abuse

Oh, and for the Republicans, please, please, please, please pick Mitt Romney. His economic bona fides involve cutting people's jobs. That will play really well in Ohio and Michigan. Also, all of this opportunistic politician talk about Obama has to end the second McCain picks Romney (what with his record on gay rights and abortion and tax cuts and universal healthcare and... you get the idea). Please let it be Mittens.

Posted by: bradleyhirsh | July 12, 2008 8:16 PM | Report abuse

I hope that Obama picks Kaine or Sebelius, and not Clinton. This not really a knock against her. She is a capable, passionate, intelligent politician, and I will be proud to vote for her for Senate again when I move back to New York state, or support her if she were to be the head of something like HHS to help pass universal health care, but bringing her into the vice-presidency means you bring her husband and all of his baggage with him. The first rule of the Obama campaign is apparently "No drama" (which is is distinct contrast to McCain's campaign right now), and Bill Clinton brings nothing but drama with him. This is unfortunate for Hillary Clinton because I think she has the potential (or already is) a much more capable public servant than her husband ever was.

Posted by: bradleyhirsh | July 12, 2008 8:12 PM | Report abuse

and Mark Cantley

I can honestly say if obama picked Sebelius...she's nice and all...but even I (and I wasn't a Hillary supporter but can't wait for Caroline Kennedy to run) ...even I would second guess Obama...if his most important decision for President and the one that really shows us who he is...ended up him picking Gov. Sebelius...
that is not a pick for the country...that is a pick for a badly formed choice.

Nothing against her but she is absolutely not the next best choice to step into the shoes of the Presidency heaven forbid we were in a situation where we lost a President...and Obama knows that there are much better choices ... quite a few.

Picking her because she is a woman...isn't good enough.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 12, 2008 7:28 PM | Report abuse

and can I just say Bayh...kind of gives me that Mitt Romney feel...
ya' know?

a little too quafed...and just a tad a little too Dan Quayle...Michael Dukakis...

No offense I like Mike Dukakis ...but like Romney and Evan Buyh... you feel like they are stuffed with cotton...ya' know?

Posted by: DL | July 12, 2008 7:23 PM | Report abuse

This is the thanks BO gets from Clinton for his gracious language about her and his offers to pay off her debt (amassed long after she had no mathematical chance of winning and spent in bad faith on BO's personal destruction): An ugly last-ditch deadender plot to disrupt the convention. Tom Edsall sadly reports on this development in today's Huffington (below). No good deed goes unpunished. Supreme Court for her? Yeah, right.

Thomas B. Edsall
The Huffington Post July 12, 2008 10:46 AM

Maybe, just maybe, a bunch of delegates to the Democratic Convention in Denver will change their minds at the last minute. Maybe there is an outside chance that between now and the last week of August a critical mass will decide that Barack Obama is not their guy -- that, to the surprise of one and all, Hillary Rodham Clinton is to be the 2008 nominee after all.

That is the thinking behind a small but determined band of Hillary backers, some of whom have formed a 527 fundraising committee that has already run one $9,700 ad in the Chicago Tribune, and plans more in the weeks to come.

The Denver Group: Keeping the Democratic Party democratic, created by Georgetown Law professor Heidi Li Feldman and freelance advertising man Marc Rubin, ran an ad in Friday's Chicago Tribune declaring:

"Senator Clinton's name must be put in nomination. Her supporters must be allowed to make speeches on her behalf of her candidacy. There must be an honest roll call vote, not a symbolic one, so superdelegates can cast their votes honestly, for either candidate, as their judgment, conscience and democratic principles dictate."

Feldman told the Huffington Post that the goal of the Denver Group "is to insure substantive and legitimate selection of the nominee." DNC chairman and other party leaders "should be taking responsibility for making sure it's a legitimate procedure. They cannot demand that people simply unify around either one of them."

Feldman argued that it is entirely conceivable that an open vote could produce a Clinton victory. "Then, the decision comes down to the superdelegates. I have no Idea what they are going to do six weeks from now."

Feldman declined to say how much the group has raised, or who the donors are - "We can't disclose that information" - although he acknowledged that the 527 organization will soon have to report that data to the IRS. She said the largest donation so far is $5,000.

The Denver Group is not committed to any candidate, Feldman said, although the organization's web site, and the links provided at the site, suggest a decisive tilt toward Clinton and, in some cases, intense animosity to Obama.

Rubin, for example, writes not only on the Denver Group site, but also on Tom In Paine. There, the lead piece by Rubin is titled "The New Obama, The New Nixon and The Same Old New York Times." Rubin writes, "The analogy of Obama to Nixon is valid from many different points of view since a case can be made that Obama is the most underhanded and dishonest politician since Nixon."

Spokesfolk for the Obama campaign declined to comment on the Denver Group. It should not be confused with "Unconventional Denver," a separate anarchist organization pledged to disrupt activities at the Democratic convention. "We don't want history to remember the Democratic National Convention in Denver as something that went smoothly," Tim Simons of Unconventional Denver told the Denver Post, "We want people to know there was dissent and people spoke up." END

Posted by: Captain America | July 12, 2008 5:32 PM | Report abuse

Put Hillary on the Supreme Court. That way she has a job for life that recognizes her intellect and ability.....but spares the rest of us from her inane and obnoxious campaigns for office.

Posted by: MBW | July 12, 2008 5:19 PM | Report abuse

Put Hillary on the Supreme Court. That way she has a job that recognizes her intellect and ability.....but spares the rest of us from her inane and obnoxious campaigns for office.

Posted by: MBW | July 12, 2008 5:18 PM | Report abuse

Ms. Sebelius, er, I mean Mark Cantley, I have been to Kansas, and know it well. You see I met my final fate in KS. Make sure you, er, Ms. Sebelius avoids being splashed with water. Do not forget that.

Posted by: Margaret Hamilton | July 12, 2008 4:33 PM | Report abuse

I want to on behalf of the millions of Democrats and independents who want the Democrat's and their pro-worker, pro-middle-class policies to win in November 2008 to move this country to the greatness it deserves by naming Governor Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas as the Democratic VP running mate. First and most importantly, naming Governor Sebelius a very qualified woman to the ticket will help with bring the women who supported Hillary Clinton strongly back to the Democratic ticket. I've read many bloggers say that women will not support any woman for VP that's name Clinton. This is absolutely ridiculous. Even Senator Clinton would have to cheer naming Gov. Sebelius to the ticket if she is not selected. Many women who are holding back support for Mr. Obama would quickly move to support Obama and solidify his lead with women. Women recognize that they were so close to breaking the glass ceiling with Mrs. Clinton historic and very strong run. With that in mind, Governor Sebelius will be able to make that dream a reality. Second, and just as important, women made up 54% of the electorate. It's highly unlike that Senator Obama will be able to beat or match Senator McCain with white men. Granted, younger white males will probably be more competitive if not strong for Senator Obama. White men on the other hand will not be a constituent that Senator Obama, an African-American, can expect to win unless there is some dramatic disaster for McCain. Thus, white women, the strongest Democratic base would only be solidified and enhanced with Gov. Sebelius on the ticket. Women are more likely than men to vote anyway. Many women will register to vote in historic numbers to support the ticket and a chance to break one more glass ceiling. Women deserve at least the VP spot on the Democratic ticket with Senator Clinton's strong run and to reward for their loyalty to the Democratic Party for these many years. Think of the fundraising potential as well. Not all women contributed to Senator Clinton because some women didn't like her especially independent and Republican women. Governor Sebelius will be able to help with fundraising with women were Senator Clinton was limited. Even moderate and liberal Republican women will secretly cast a vote for an Obama-Sebelius ticket. Even Republican women realize that a McCain win means that Roe vs. Wade will be overturned since the next president will probably nominate at least one Supreme Court Justice. Third, Governor Sebelius represents change from Washington just as Senator Obama has been preaching. Disregard those who say Senator Obama needs to choose a candidate with foreign policy credentials. Well, he can shore up his national security and foreign policy credentials with his choosen Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense, and National Security Adviser. Besides, Governor Sebelius has a history of working with Republicans in Kansas. She also has demonstrated herself to be politically astute by winning in a very red state. At minimum, she knows how to take advantage of the Republican intra-party political divide that is also plaguing Senator McCain as he fights to turn out the skeptical Evangelical base. Plus, if Senator Clinton plays the attack dog role as Veep, she would only drive up her negatives because her attacks on McCain will only be dismissed as typical Clinton win-by-any means attack. Governor Sebelius would bring credible attacks on McCain as advocate of the status quo and a third Bush term.

Posted by: Mark Cantley | July 12, 2008 4:08 PM | Report abuse

If Obama has a litmus test that the VP candidate must have some of the oft-mentioned "Commander in Chief" skills (not executive experience, but work background in military, international affairs, etc.) here's a more complete VP list with experience in military, foreign policy or intelligence, consider the following:

SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE
- Dianne Feinstein (CA)
- Ron Wyden (OR)
- Evan Bayh (IN)
- Russ Feingold (WI)
- Bill Nelson (FL)

SENATE ARMED SERVICES
- Carl Levin (MI)
- Jack Reed (RI)
- Bill Nelson (FL)
- Ben Nelson (NE)
- Evan Bayh (IN)
- Hillary Clinton (NY)

SENATE FOREIGN RELATIONS
- Joe Biden (DE)
- Chris Dodd (CT)
- John Kerry (MA
- Russ Feingold (WI)
- Bill Nelson (FL)

Finding House members with a bit of gravitas or name recognition in these areas is hard, but here are a couple.

HOUSE HOMELAND SECURITY
- Jane Harman (CA)

HOUSE FOREIGN AFFAIRS
- Howard Berman (CA)
- Robert Wexler (FL)

HOUSE ARMED SERVICES
- John Spratt (SC)

Joe Biden and Evan Bayh are probably the most mentioned on this list and should both be in Obama's top 3 right now, in my opinion. Clinton and Dodd have also been mentioned, but I think both are improbable right now.

But, the less mentioned people that emerge from this list for me that could be darkhorses are:
- Jack Reed
- Bill Nelson
- Dianne Feinstein
- John Spratt

Posted by: MNobserver | July 12, 2008 3:57 PM | Report abuse

Sunshine, much appreciated and I'll make the correction. As for HRC's placement, I agree with your suggestion she be placed lower but one problem: according to the best census data I had there were only 301,139,942 persons in the US. If you forward me a different pop. number, I'll see about moving HRC further down on the list. World Peace.

Posted by: Broadway Joe | July 12, 2008 2:39 PM | Report abuse

Broadway Joe, your long list is very informative, but FYI, it is M.K (not J) Letourneau. But no need to learn how to spell the name if she remains the 301,139,942nd choice for VP. I also think you still have Clinton too high on the list.

Posted by: Sunshine | July 12, 2008 2:22 PM | Report abuse

My friends, I now have what I believe to be BO's (revised) long list for veep (in order of preference). Because of its length, I share only a few excerpts. The good news (I guess) is HRC is still on BO's revised list. And there are some surprises:

1. Tim Kaine
2. Claire McCaskill
3. Bob Richardson
4. Patti Solis Doyle (PSD totally rocks and has developed a huge cult following; let's keep an eye on her!)
5. Wesley Clark (deserves our support for again and again speaking the truth to power regarding the completely media-invented record of our opponent)
6. Chuck Hagel (rock solid)
7. James Webb (keep calling him; the best wingman in the business, if he says he "has your back" you can keep looking forward unlike with you-know-who; odd views on AAs and women, but we'll work that)
* * * * * * *
301,139,939. K. Sebelius (heard of some concerns among young voters re scariness; start thinking of Jack Elam or S. Epatha Merkeson as possible replacements)
301,139,940. G. Condit
301,139,941. Robert Blake ("Rooster" may not participate in campaign)
301,139,942. M.J. Latourneau (strong in youth outreach)
301,139,943. Ellen Degeneris (if picked, have her leave the men's dress suits at home)
301,139,944. Michael Richards (vocabulary concerns here)
301,139,945. Bea Arthur (strong on mature outreach and may pull in Rose Marie's crowd)
301,139,946. Rev. J. Jackson (frisk him carefully)
301,139,947. H.R. Clinton (nuff said)

Posted by: Broadway Joe | July 12, 2008 2:01 PM | Report abuse

Obama might as well pick Jindal---Jindal is no fiscal conservative---he is a big spending, take care of his buddies, big government guy. His ethics reform do not include his own office. He put standards on the lowest member of a volunteer board that he will not put on himself.

He is a career bureaucrat and politician and regret I ever voted for him.

Let the democrats have him.

Posted by: Mike in Louisiana | July 12, 2008 1:15 PM | Report abuse

Chuck Hagel would bring the most to strengthen an Obama ticket. Who better than McCain's "buddy" to counter his positions and broaden the tickets appeal in the purple AND Red states..

A principled patriot with gravitas . Decorated war vet. Successful business CEO. Not running for reelection. Bi-partisan record. Foreign relations experience. A true maverick with backbone. Popular among independents. Attractive, articulate, forceful and likeable.

Posted by: Hagel for VP | July 12, 2008 1:00 PM | Report abuse

Root Beer, MBW, you are right on the money. Perhaps Obama should give Hillary healthcare, and that would make everyone happy. She could have a second shot at it, maybe do it right this time.

Obama has made it clear he admires Sebelius, and giving one bad speech doesn't rule her out. However, the top choice should be able to trounce McCain's pick in the VP debate. That is the primary job of the VP candidate. So the question is, can Sebelius debate. I don't know that, but I know Biden, Richardson and Sam Nunn can.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 12, 2008 12:42 PM | Report abuse

Obviously a Florida and Nelson fan, but

Obama needs to have more familiarity without losing the change mantra...

I keep going back to Biden because there is nobody who has been the face of "fighting to change the Bush policies" for the American people.

I know he puts his foot in his mouth because he talks so much...

but isn't that because he was the guy from the Dems that was fighting every weekend with someone from the Bush administration on our tv sets to change their policies.

Listen I know people think they have all these further dreams about change in this election...but at this point Barack needs to show a choice that is ... "safer" for the American people.

He needs a familiarity and to ignore a candidate that has experience would be enormously detrimental.

I think if he is looking at the reasons you pick a VP...not based on one state but who has the qualities of a candidate to oversee a "cabinet"... there is no avoiding Biden.

Look...for a support to that idea...which choice is on everybodies lists for not only VP byt also...sec of state, sec of defense...etc.

Biden is on the list for almost every position in the cabinet.

with Obama winning significantly on economy...he needs to shore up more on the experience, familiarity and foreign policy front.

sorry don't mean to sound like a broken record but there is really only one smart choice at this point...by the numbers so to speak...
and that's Biden

Posted by: DL | July 12, 2008 12:36 PM | Report abuse

Hillary already has a new job: martyr in chief.

Posted by: MBW | July 12, 2008 11:13 AM | Report abuse

Lay off Sebelius. She's just fine...as long as she stays away from water thrown at her.

Posted by: Margaret Hamilton | July 12, 2008 11:09 AM | Report abuse

Mr. Cillizza, politics bloggers: Barack Obama's pick for vice president needs to be untainted by scandal and the picture of mainstream. Of the six or seven remaining names on Obama's original list of 16 potentials, that points to Evan Bayh or Bill Nelson. I think that means Nelson. Why? Because he's a moderate, cautious Democrat who easily wins statewide in the Republican-leaning battleground state of Florida. ( There, in 2006, he retired the infamous Katherine Harris 61 percent to 39 percent. ) More importantly, he has had a long but squeaky clean public-service career as a state lawmaker, congressman, Florida Cabinet officer and U.S. senator, currently serving on the Foreign Relations, Armed Services and Intelligence committees. Plus, he put it on the line big-time in 1986 when he rocketed into the heavens aboard the space shuttle Columbia. Can anyone left on the Obama list top all that?

Posted by: Obviously a Florida and Nelson fan, but . . . | July 12, 2008 11:06 AM | Report abuse

The Democratic Party will be so much better off when we can end the psychodrama of the Clintons and make room for new leaders with new ideas.

(and no more of the drama...)

Posted by: MBW | July 12, 2008 11:00 AM | Report abuse

Has Sebelius gone yet? Is she still there? I don't want to spend all weekend hiding under the bed. Will someone get my parents before she gets me. Please.

Posted by: American Young People | July 12, 2008 10:59 AM | Report abuse

Time to end the cult of personality around Hillary.

To say that Kathleen Sebelius is not qualified is an INSULT.

Some of these Hillary-philes think there is no other smart woman out there besides Hillary.

She has won multiple elections at the local level and has also been elected TWICE as the Democractic governor of one of the reddest states in America.

She was named one of the "5 Best Governors In America" in a bipartisan ranking by Time Magazine.

And she did all of this WITHOUT having a famous husband or being First Lady.

She's a highly qualifed woman....but without the ridiculous drama.

Posted by: MBW | July 12, 2008 10:54 AM | Report abuse

It's clear from some of these Hillary supporters that they're really not interested in putting a woman in the White House....for them, it's all about the cult of personality around Hillary.

To say that Kathleen Sebelius is not qualified is an INSULT.

She has won multiple elections at the local level and has also been elected TWICE as the Democractic governor of one of the reddest states in America.

She was named one of the "5 Best Governors In America" in a bipartisan ranking by Time Magazine.

And she did all of this WITHOUT having a famous husband or being First Lady.

She's a highly qualifed woman....but without the ridiculous drama.

Posted by: MBW | July 12, 2008 10:53 AM | Report abuse

They are both waiting to see where the other is leaning.

If Obama picks a man ...McCain is going to pick a woman. That is the bottom line.

If obama picks a woman...Mccain is going to pick a better candidate.

If obama picks Hillary... McCain picks a centrist...becasue half of America won't vote for her and he wraps up the right.

If Obama picks a man Mccain picks Palin or another of the women on the list.

but if Obama picks Biden...then Mccain is stuck. Because over the woman man issue...he has to make sure his VP doesn't look like an idiot...and that might be hard if you don't have a candidate that atleast won't be trounced in a debate with Biden. Hard enough with your best guy...never mind the selection he has to choose from for women.

Posted by: DL | July 12, 2008 10:51 AM | Report abuse

Kathleen Sinbelius has in NO WAY shown the ability to be President of the United States.

to pick her would be suicide.

Obama we know...he has taken chances... he has come out and shown that he will put his rep on the line for the right choice...

he has been talking and showing he understands the issues he argues...whether you like him or not.

If kathleen sibelius gets all this...I have not seen one iota of it.

She is incredibly unqualified.

Not because she is a woman...but because she IS UNQUALIFIED. we are at war...we are dealing with international and national issues and she has shown no national leadership on any of them.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 12, 2008 10:43 AM | Report abuse

I think Kathleen Sibelius, no offense to her but...

the dumbest of the choices.


There is even a chance that that would be the straw that broke the camel's back for many.

If obama doesn't pick someone who has a ton going for them in the sheer wealth of knowledge space...

that means he is acting, again, like a typical pol. Sibelius...would be

a gov. from a state that he already is from.

a woman over Hillary.

an unknown to the American people...we don't want to risk that MUCH change in a year like this one.

and has absolutely no foreign policy experience.

I (and I am his biggest champion around) would have to think twice if he picked her.

Posted by: dl | July 12, 2008 10:38 AM | Report abuse

Bill Richardson. He brings extensive experience at a number of levels of government, is right on the issues, very capable of stepping in as president in a case of a tragedy (which SHOULD be the number one criteria), and politically, brings in NM and a number of marginal western states and delivers the Hispanic vote in a big way. The statement that we should not have two minorities on the ticket is straight out of the 20th century. I believe we have the right candidate in Obama, regardless of color, age, or sex. Let's do as well with the VP choice.

Posted by: Wayne P | July 12, 2008 10:11 AM | Report abuse

Kathleen Sebellius scares us. She looks like that scary woman in the Ilsa movies. She may get us. I don't want to spend four years hiding under the bed. Is she gone now? No, you peek out. I'm not going to. I think she's still there.

Posted by: American Young People | July 12, 2008 9:28 AM | Report abuse

This idea that choosing Kathleen Sebellius is not a good pick because it would offend too many female clinton supporters is itself offensive!. I agree with the above comment 100% that this idea is ten times more sexist than anything Hillary faced during the primaries. If Kathleen Sebellius is qualified, better suited to and more consistent with Barack's message and vision then she should be made VP, and Barack, let no pundit or column, Chuck Todd (who is usually quite good but has gone off the rails on this one) or anybody else spouting this sexist and misguided sentiment pressure you into doing otherweise. Kathleen Sebellius has shown great leadership skills in demonstrating her ability to work accross party lines and will make a fine vice president.

Posted by: Joshua James | July 12, 2008 6:37 AM | Report abuse

Hillary rest, your time back is coming soon because BO is going to loose badly

Posted by: John | July 12, 2008 5:09 AM | Report abuse

sebelius and pawlenty.

the guys in the dem party don't cut it- with the exception of richardson, but american isn't ready for a black and a latino on the same ticket. it would hurt in penn and ohio. (ps. i hate you rust belt knuckleheads and racist silly rabbits.) and taking clinton would make obama look weak, so he can't. (if only the clintons were truly smart they wouldn't have boxed him in like that.) so sebelius is the best play.

on the rep side. romney decimates mccains support amongst the bible-thumpin' bigots. too bad the repubs have conditioned their supporters to be so narrow-minded. plus, let's be honest, all of the major players hate romney and think he's FAKE. Huckabees comment that the Mormons think Jesus and the Devil are brothers speaks volumes. So Pawlenty is the safe choice to help with the evangelicals who are key in ohio, indiana, missourah, etc.

but it doesn't matter: if there's no scandal obama wins in a landslide. if there's a mini-scandal for obama - one of his advisors is half as crooked as gramm - then mccain wins by a landslide.

ain't that america. home of the racists.

Posted by: JR, Boston | July 12, 2008 4:37 AM | Report abuse

On Kathleen Sebelius.
Someone- perhaps Obama introducing her as his pick, perhaps Hillary reacting- needs to put to bed the idea that Sebelius as VP is something we can accept would fairly offend Hillary supporters. The suggestion is that if Obama decided she were his top choice to run with, he should not do so solely because she's another woman. That is a 10 on the sexist scale- worse than what Hillary faced- and the fact that I've heard some Hillary supporters express this attitude makes me doubt the sincerity of their interest in gender equality. If Hillary herself is sincere about it, though maybe disappointed that she didn't get VP (or also maybe not; who knows?), she should find it great that a woman is on the ticket. Hillary talks about her candidacy as a triumph for feminism, but what was she trying to do? Get a prize no woman has gotten before? Or change the country so women have the same opportunities men have? She didn't achieve the former but if Sebelius or her or another woman becomes Vice-President, there's a case to be made that Hillary did acheive something on the latter count. As Al Gore said to Howard Dean, "You know, it's not about you. It's about your country." I'm not saying it should be Sebelius or that it should not be Hillary or that it should not be a man. No matter who Obama picks, I'm not going to second guess the strategy of what so far has been the best designed campaign I've seen in ages. Whoever it is, I will vote for Obama. I think most Americans will do the same regardless of who the VP pick is.

But the idea that Sebelius as VP offends Hillary suporters offends me.

Posted by: Root Beer | July 12, 2008 4:27 AM | Report abuse

It amazes me how you can leave Sarah Palin off the list. Then again, that is par for the course when it comes to her. She is "under the radar" and a walking time-bomb to liberal hopes in November!

On EVERY point, especially energy and government reform, she is KRYPTONITE to the Dem's "superman".

Ignore her at your peril! She IS the future and she WILL BE McCain's ticket to victory in November!

Posted by: Dave II | July 12, 2008 2:53 AM | Report abuse

Obama is the main man, and you either like him or hate him. So, I can't think of any VP that would improve his chance of winning except Sen. Clinton. However, I think she would turn down VP position.

For Sen. McCain, Bobby Jindal. I did not think this guy had a chance, but if you check out his bio on Wikipedia you will see that his resume is very impressive. However, because he is an Indian he would not be trusted to be a VP. However, when compared to the other candidates, Jindal might be the only candidate that would enable the Republicans to win. So the Rep. would hate choosing Jindal, but they might have no choice but to choose him.

Posted by: Ramon C. | July 12, 2008 2:17 AM | Report abuse

For McCain it seems Romney or Pawlenty will be the pick. I'm still hoping that he decides to go another way and pick Sara Palin (Gov. Alaska)

As for Obama, I'm against Clinton, keep her off the ticket. I'm thinking Biden may be the choice through default. Bill Richardson is an interesting choice, but the country may not accept two minorites on the same ticket.

Posted by: Don Squires | July 12, 2008 1:57 AM | Report abuse

You foolish pundits are all wrong. It's HILLARY all the way for Obama's choice. It's written all over his face. It doesn't matter what their respective surrogates think, as long as Barak & Hillary like each other, the nation will go with them. And its not just for the election Barak vs. McCain, its also for the opportunity to win super majority in both house and the senate races for the democratic candidates.

Posted by: voirob | July 12, 2008 1:50 AM | Report abuse

Recently same-sex marriage is a hot topic. Personally, i think it's great, especially for GLBT. One of my friends, who found her another part on the online community BiLoves, decided to get married recently. Hope they have a great marriage life.

Posted by: eric33 | July 12, 2008 1:38 AM | Report abuse

Yo, RealChoices

Why do you hate Clintons??

Posted by: imagination | July 12, 2008 1:33 AM | Report abuse

Wow, all bloggers are suddenly-intelligent folks with perfect English! Interesting tactic....

Posted by: imagination | July 12, 2008 1:29 AM | Report abuse

Leon said:

"But I know that those of you who hate her- and really can't give any valid reasons- because he is just as much the politician and ran just as rough a campaign- will come up with every reason why the 50% (18 million) of us who voted for her are invalid or wrong."

It's not the 50% of you who voted for Clinton in the primaries I'm worried about, Leon. It's the 50% of America who say that no way, no how, will they EVER vote for her that I am worried about. The Democrats are trying to win the White House, not lose it. Sorry. Not going to happen. If Obama chooses Clinton then I have badly misjudged his judgment.

Posted by: Mark | July 12, 2008 1:11 AM | Report abuse

If Dems want to have the first woman president, they need to start clearing a path for the up-and-coming women by putting one on the ticket:

Kathleen Sebelius
Janet Napolitano
Blanche Lincoln (a dark horse favorite of mine)
Christine Gregoire

Hillary Clinton has had her 2+ decades in the spotlight....

time to let some of these other highly qualified women have some air time.

Keeping Hillary around only makes it more likely that the first woman president will be a Republican.

Posted by: MBW | July 12, 2008 12:59 AM | Report abuse

If Barack Obama wants to end the veep vetting fiasco and, at the same time, guarantee his winning of the presidential election in November, all he has to do is to announce that his choice for vice president is Caroline Kennedy Strassberg. The name Kennedy was and, will remain, a sure winner among the U.S. electorate. Another Kennedy in the White House is a sure winner for Obama.

Posted by: Richard C. Seeman | July 12, 2008 12:53 AM | Report abuse

If HRC is not on the ticket, Who do you think McCain will pick as his VP? Sarah Palin's American bio will give the Republicans a much needed face lift and media boost. Look her up: its quite an impressive record. Many would argue that she has more executive experience than the Democratic Nominee. She is squeaky clean!!!

The only thing the current Republican list does for America is help them weed off sleeping pills: it is boring.....


Here is my two cents on his best choices w/o a democratic dream ticket:

1. Sarah Palin (may take him over the top and would instantly Re-brand the party: its a PR/AD GOLD mine)

2. Bobby Jindal (same as above plus some $)

3. Colin Powell (is highly respected by all americans)

4. Condalezza Rice (she would be on top of the list if it was not for the on-going "Bush third term" brain washing by the left)

5. Generic: another old or mid aged white guy


If he is forced to compete with the dream ticket (basically, a mission to nowhere):

1. Colin Powell (would give him a shred of hope= The American Hero ticket)

2. Mitt Romney (MI & NH would remain competitive plus $$$$$)

3. Michael Blomberg (independents and much needed $$$$$)

4. Charlie Crist (would secure Florida against the dream ticket)

5. Joe Lieberman (has nothing to loose at this point: bipartisan appeal= Maverick ticket)


I just think an Obama/Clinton ticket is virtually impossible to compete with.

Posted by: jws/America08 | July 12, 2008 12:52 AM | Report abuse

Wow -except for Kathleen Sebelius, I'm not crazy about any of the Dems you named. My first choice is Wes Clark. I like that he stood behind what he said about McCain, I like that he was right in what he said about McCain, and he has excellent military and leadership experience. He's strong in all the places Obama might be considered weak.

Dodd would be OK, Kucinich too much to hope for, Edwards should be his Attorney General.

Posted by: Morgaine Swann | July 12, 2008 12:15 AM | Report abuse

Keep Hillary off the ticket.

If you want to drive away Moderate Democrats and Republicans along with independents who are willing to give Obama a chance with his message of change then select Clinton. Hillary and Bill have proven it is all about them and not about the party or the people. If the women who won't vote or will vote for McCain to spite Obama then they may set back women's rights a few decades when McCain selects the next two to three Supreme Court Justices. Only a fool cuts off their nose to spite their face. The democratic party is spending way to much time trying to mend fences within the Party vs winning the White House. We can all send Hillary and Bill a dollar or two once Obama is in the White House.

Hopefully Obama will find a running mate with national security and foreign policy experience who views run right down the center. This election will be closer then it should be and the democrats can lose it when they should be winning in a landslide. With a Republican President who has run the economy into the ground this election should be an easy win. Lets not screw it up!

Posted by: Moderate Democrat | July 12, 2008 12:15 AM | Report abuse

For Sen. McC:
Mitt Romney
Ms.Carly Fiorina
Sen. K. Bailey Hutchinson
Krisy Todd Whitman

For Obama:
David Dinkins
OJ Simpson
Oprah Winfrey
Al Sharpton
Jessy jackson
Rev. Wright
Robert Mogaby

Posted by: Don Johnson | July 12, 2008 12:13 AM | Report abuse

Regarding Romney, I wonder if he could pull in MA?

Now wouldn't that be a big slap in the face for Obama, Kennedy and Kerry?

I'd laugh my pattuddy off if that happened!

Posted by: Christina | July 11, 2008 11:56 PM | Report abuse

Of the McCain options listed on this blog, I like Sarah Palin best.

As I said before, McCain needs to shake it up a bit!

Personally, I'd love to see Christine Todd Whitman, but she's pro-choice. And I don't think the GOP would go for a pro-choice VP.

Posted by: Christina | July 11, 2008 11:52 PM | Report abuse

Romney brings the McCain camp money, Michigan, increases likelihood of winning in NH, CO and NV and has credentials on the economy- a likely pick for VP

Richardson is the best pick for VP for the Dems- he ensures NM and may help with CO and NV; he has foriegn policy credentials. However, if a self-identified African American and a Latin man on the ticket is problematic for some Bayh might be a good pick as he also has credentials and puts a Red state IN, within reach. Kaine has so little experience it is painful. I don't think he wants to put another senator on and if he does- her name should probably be Clinton, since she makes him more competitive in NV, NM, CO (he won caucuses there- when 100,000 people voted- when it is a real election, she draws the large Latin community), MI, OH, FL, AK, TN, and WV and decreases fall off in PA, CA and NJ where he shouldn't be spending money.

But I know that those of you who hate her- and really can't give any valid reasons- because he is just as much the politician and ran just as rough a campaign- will come up with every reason why the 50% (18 million) of us who voted for her are invalid or wrong.

Keep hating, it does the party well.

Leon

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2008 11:50 PM | Report abuse

Sen. Reed of Rhode Island has impressive credentials that can complement Obama: veteren, Catholic, great on both domestic and foreign policy issues. He's heading to Iraq with Obama and Hagel. I'm surprised he isn't discussed more in all this VP selection frenzy(or maybe that is a good thing).

Posted by: Claire | July 11, 2008 11:32 PM | Report abuse

Okay here's one of the best lists I think anyone could ask for:

McCain:
5. Bobby Jindal
4. Tim Pawlenty
3. Charlie Crist
2. Joe Liberman
1. Mike Huckabee

Obama:
5. Caroline Kennedy
4. Chris Matthews
3. Joe Biden
2. Bill Richardson
1. Chuck Hagel

Posted by: Austin Redmon | July 11, 2008 11:18 PM | Report abuse

Ted:

You might be right about Sarah Palin. She does sound interesting and could give McCain a jump start he so desperately needs. I guess the only downside is that it creates a huge contrast with the attractive, energetic and youthful Palin and the old, boring, near-comatose McCain. Many will think Sarah should be the nominee not McCain.

Posted by: HonestAbe | July 11, 2008 11:02 PM | Report abuse

When FlaLady was pretending to be the candidate that did nothing for equal rights, I could not have been more shocked to find she was talking about Obama. That was definitely a double take.

Personally, I think Crist finally getting married means that it will be him for the Republicans.

I would love to see an Obama-Lincoln Chafee ticket. Realistically, I think it may be Biden, Dodd, or Bayh. I think the Sebelius thing the other day was a feint.

Posted by: Jen | July 11, 2008 10:56 PM | Report abuse

We're not fooled by your and the Washington Post's failure to include Sarah Palin. In all likelihood, Gov. Palin WILL be McCain's pick for Veep. Her positives -- too numerous to mention here and/or I don't feel like recounting them, suffice to say go google her -- far far outweigh any negatives (which are practically non-existent), and assertions of her lack of experience are completely bogus (but if the Dems or their allied-MSM want to allege that, I say BRING IT ON!).

Your, along with the rest of the MSM's dismissal of Palin is due to one thing, and one thing only, YOU ARE ALL DEATHLY AFRAID OF HER ON MCCAIN'S TICKET (because you know deep down with her on it Team McCain and the GOP win in November). But as much as you try to pretend Palin away, or engage in self-denial, she is here, she will be Veep, McCain/Palin will then win for a number of obvious reasons, the GOP will be rejuvinated as the Party of REAL change, and Palin will likely go on to become the first female President of the United States (and as a life-long GOPer myself, I'll enjoy it all the way watching the squirming Dems and MSM).

You can take this comment to the bank!

Posted by: Ted | July 11, 2008 10:52 PM | Report abuse

I can't figure why Bill Bradley's name isn't being mentioned. If Gore hadn't had the party organization lined up, Bradley would have won the nomination and, without the hindrance of Clinton fatigue and media dislike which weighed down Gore, would probably have thumped Bush in 2000 and now be finishing up his 2nd term. Obama needs a nationally known, experienced and highly regarded VP selection to deal with the theme of inexperience and naivete which will be pounded against him during the campaign. What's more, what blue collar(or white collar, for that matter) white male wouldn't be favorably disposed to a former Knicks' superstar on the ticket? Not to mention, clean as a whistle and didn't he have good credibility with the women? I live in Va and like Kaine but can't see him as the VP pick; he has even less high level experience than Obama does. Of course Kerry picking Edwards didn't make much sense to me either. Obama needs desperately someone who will reassure the electorate, not put question marks in their minds, a Democratic Cheney, if you will, who will operate in the daylight, rather than on the "dark side". As noted by another commenter, to have a top 5 list which doesn't include Bill Richardson doesn't make much sense to me.

Posted by: Bill | July 11, 2008 10:36 PM | Report abuse

MarkinAustin; Thank you for the info on Chet Edwards. He sounds interesting, I looked up his subcommittee, it decides on military housing and benefits. I wonder if he is really being considered, or if that is just a rumor.

Broadway Joe: Love your complete list of dem Veep candidates. I disagree with Mark Warner in 1st place, but at 301,139,947, you got Hillary pegged right where she belongs!

Posted by: Sunshine | July 11, 2008 10:35 PM | Report abuse

No Ditto, all the polling says that the 18 million were made up of far more registered Democrats than anything else, including Senator Obama's total, which depended heavily on independents and Republicans getting excited in states where the Republican race was over. Just check the polls- don't make up stuff just because of unreaonable hatred for Hillary.

Leon

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2008 10:32 PM | Report abuse

A black guy and a woman on the same ticket might be one too many historic barriers broken for America.

Posted by: HonestAbe | July 11, 2008 10:22 PM | Report abuse

As a moderate Democrat, I would gladly welcome Hillary on the ticket with Obama.

And if McCain was smart, he'd search high and low for a woman for his ticket. Heck, I'll even take Condi Rice.

I'm thirsty for a female perspective on national and international affairs. I've had enough of male egos for the last 238 years!

Posted by: Christina | July 11, 2008 10:17 PM | Report abuse

McCain needs to go for a home run. He needs to jump start his campaign with an exciting VP like a woman or maybe a black guy. Romney is pathetic. That is a sure loser.

Posted by: HonestAbe | July 11, 2008 10:17 PM | Report abuse

Most of the 18 million were part of Limbaugh's Operation Chaos, which was more successful than the corporate media cared to admit.

Posted by: Ditto | July 11, 2008 10:13 PM | Report abuse

The smart choice would be Richardson.

==========

I like Richardson too but two minorities on the same ticket might be one too many. It might also p*ss off the Hillary crowd even more.

Posted by: HonestAbe | July 11, 2008 10:12 PM | Report abuse

Debbie -

Your comments about Sarah Palin are ridiculous! She is clearly pro-life, so it would be expected that she would keep her baby regardless of any developmental conditions. I don't think this classifies her as a moron.

Posted by: Christina | July 11, 2008 10:10 PM | Report abuse

correct me if i am wrong, but intcamd1 certainly seems to have an unhealthy obsession with clinton and/or obama. anger management, anyone?

Posted by: americanandproudofit | July 11, 2008 10:10 PM | Report abuse

What about Sen. Russ Feingold?
=====

Too liberal. Obama already has the "lib" label. He needs a conservative white guy.

Posted by: HonestAbe | July 11, 2008 10:09 PM | Report abuse

I keep reading about Hillarys 18 million supporters. Where's the money? I believe that many of these 18 million were republicans.

Posted by: Honesty | July 11, 2008 10:07 PM | Report abuse

Jindal is a nut. He wrote something about an exorcism he participated in and was convinced he helped exorcise a demon out of a friend of his. I think the vetting process might catch that one.

Posted by: HonestAbe | July 11, 2008 10:07 PM | Report abuse

And Sen. Feingold underlines the message of "changing the politics of washington"

Posted by: CJ | July 11, 2008 10:04 PM | Report abuse

What about Sen. Russ Feingold? Brillant, Rhodes scholar, co-sponsor of campaignn finance, voted against the Iraq war ( so at least he has good judgment), and unlike many of the other senators, he isnt "bought" and corrupted. I'm amazed that his name has never been mentioned!!!

Posted by: CJ | July 11, 2008 10:03 PM | Report abuse

I was at first a tepid Clinton supporter after Edwards dropped out and became increasingly committed to her as I reacted to the way the media and the Party leadership treated her, i.e., UNFAIRLY. However, I don't want her to be on the ticket because she would be blamed if Obama loses, as I fear he will. Best case is that she is offered the spot and declines it. I would hope that the offer would placate the 30% of her voters who say they won't vote for Obama (according to today's Newsweek poll). I will vote for Obama and I want him to win, but I think he is a Democrat in name only. His recent lurch to the right is disgusting. Does he think we won't notice? Does he assume that no matter what he does we have no choice? I may change my mind about voting for him, just as he does on a daily basis.

Posted by: Yellow Dog | July 11, 2008 10:01 PM | Report abuse

As long as BO doesn't pick Claire "Eddie" McCaskill or Tim Kaine - I'm okay with whatever he decides.

And for McCain, he has to shake things up a bit - he has to go with a woman, a minority - or a younger man with lots of pizazz on the campaign trail - a charmer that makes us all go "ooh, la, la."

Let's make this general election as exciting as the Democratic primary - and wake everybody up! We're all asleep from exhaustion from the Hill vs. BO semi-final.

Posted by: Christina | July 11, 2008 10:01 PM | Report abuse

Jindal? Isn't that the governor who is obsessed with "fixing" all the male inmates in Louisiana. Like the way you "fix" an animal. Bobby, it's not the 1880s. What's next dueling pistols?

Posted by: Ouch | July 11, 2008 9:59 PM | Report abuse

Kaine would be good but I still think its going to be Evan Bayh. VA is critical but I think Obama wins VA even without Kaine. Bayh probably delivers Indiana which would be huge. Bayh also helps Obama with the bitter, "clingers" of the bluecollar rust belt in OH and PA and elsewhere. Also, being a Hillary supporter he should help bring more former Hillary people back to Obama. Bayh also has foreign relations and military creds being on Armed Services Committee and the Select Intelligence Committee. Hard to see any negatives with Bayh except maybe he is not very charismatic but Obama needs no help in that department.

Posted by: HonestAbe | July 11, 2008 9:57 PM | Report abuse

You forgot about me for vice president. I'm qualified. I crashed five Buicks in a series of DUIs and then spent five years as a prisoner in the Mayberry jail, endlessly interrogated and hassled by Andy and Barney, not to mention Aunt Bee.

Posted by: Otis of Mayberry | July 11, 2008 9:42 PM | Report abuse

Lakisha nice try and nice choice of name. i can almost almost bet your name is lynn or florence and are some dentally challenged overweight middle aged white woman whose husband works so she can stay home and keep house. just the kind of woman a mccain candidacy would appeal to.

Posted by: lynn's therapist | July 11, 2008 9:37 PM | Report abuse

Hillary will not be Obama's VP. Howard Wolfson said on Fox a couple of days ago Hillary was not being vetted. Three Presidents are two too many.

Posted by: HonestAbe | July 11, 2008 9:33 PM | Report abuse

Conventional wisdom often proves wrong and the author was on the right track that Obama is not looking to protect his flank. However, I've heard Obama has already made his decision and it is no one mentioned in the article: http://lowtechtimes.com/2008/06/26/barack-obama-selects-running-mate/

Posted by: S.P. Gass | July 11, 2008 9:30 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin??? Are you kidding me? Palin, 44, has a newborn baby with Down's Syndrome. Aside from the extreme burden that places on any parent, it suggests she has no common sense. Any 44 year old pregnant woman who doesn't have an amniocentesis is a moron.

Posted by: Debbie | July 11, 2008 9:28 PM | Report abuse

You put Hillary Clinton on the Ticket and a lot of moderate democrats, moderate republicans, and independents will not consider the Obaman/Clinton ticket. He has a chance if he stays fresh and continues to talk hope and change. Putting Hillary on the ticket loses all hope for America and change. People will work aggressively to insure another Clinton does not get near the White House.

Selections 1 through 4 would be OK, just drop # 5!

Posted by: Moderate Democrat | July 11, 2008 9:27 PM | Report abuse

Tim Kaine?

Hello? Anyone home?

The smart choice would be Richardson.

Posted by: info | July 11, 2008 9:21 PM | Report abuse

fix, please, please stop using that pic of katherine sebelius -- it makes her look like the wicked witch of the (mid)west.

i think bayh might not be a bad choice. i'm leery of kaine. didn't he give one of the democrats' responses to a state of the union a couple of years back? he wasn't impressive. (granted, that's not a lot to go on, but you gotta figure the guy prepped and prepped for it, and yet still failed to deliver.)

while you're at the sebelius pic, please fix your own. you look better on hardball.

Posted by: dcdc1211 | July 11, 2008 9:15 PM | Report abuse

Indeed, those who claim to be "in the know" are speculating. If you include an electoral map analysis (using primary data, specific demographics and reliable polls), this democratic list would be turned upside down: in other words, HRC would be the clear choice and no other candidate comes close: How so?

Lets look at the battle ground states. The following states are more likely to go democratic:

OH, MI, MO (recall, HRC won most of the counties)
PA,(catholics),NH, NV(Latinos)and NM(Latinos).

Which states become competitive?

AK,WV and FL (Latino & Mature voters)

Which states would become a lost cause for McCain to pursue?

NJ, CT and CA

why does that matter? It matters because the "dream ticket" can focus on the battlegrounds and allocate funds accordingly.


The notion that Bill would undermine an Obama administration is unwarranted. HRC is clearly her own person . It is not difficult to envision the role that the former president would take on: A FORMER PRESIDENT. What does that entail? They tend to focus on philanthropy, fund raising and act as unofficial ambassadors when called upon by their country. Is America in a position to simply cast away such a potent asset? Exactly....


Hence, if Barack wants to "change the electoral map" he should select HRC. Their united Coalition would be motivated in all 50 states. A united democratic constituency would be virtually impossible to stop this go around.

The international media boom would be unprecedented (Think about the American PR): America will be led by an African American and a Woman. And, "my friends" that is change we believe in and welcome.


Posted by: jws/America08 | July 11, 2008 9:01 PM | Report abuse

Jose P. Profeta, my friend, the HRC deadenders like "intcamd1," Harriet Christian, G. Ferraro, Carmella Lewis and the rest (not the reasonable HRCers like Patti Solis and even Carville -- they are very reachable and to be respected; they get it) cannot be reached by BO; they are lost causes (for goodness sake, Carmella Lewis had paper in her ears so she couldn't ear BO at the Unity event! How juvenile is that?). Even if BO picked HRC as veep, these diehards would still be gathered at some bar by the RR tracks sending hate blasts at BO until closing time. It is time to move on from HRC's performance artists (how many times will they act up at public events like the Rules Committee meeting and the Unity NH meeting) and walk into the future: away from HRC's "triangulation," "fighting 'til the last dog dies," the r- card, the RFK a-card, the gender card, and all that lunacy. HRC as veep does not win BO a single state or a single voter. She only wins him heartburn, big time. The North Pole has no ice cap, gas is approaching $5 a gallon -- think about it. Let's focus on that and not the self-absorbed world of HRC. World Peace.

Posted by: Broadway Joe | July 11, 2008 9:00 PM | Report abuse

Perhaps John McCain has a slight advantage in being able to choose his vice-presidential nominee after Barack does. However, I do not think any of the names mentioned above will help him. Colin Powell or Condi Rice are the only Republicans, more or less, who could help McCain with many independents and moderate Democrats, but the party's right wing would have a fit because both are too moderate on social issues for them.

I do not think any of those mentioned above would help Barack and Hillary would likely result in a net loss of votes, especially among independents, moderate Republicans and progressives tired of the Clintons' hubris. I still think Bill Richardson would be Barack's best choice for vice-president.

Posted by: Independent | July 11, 2008 8:47 PM | Report abuse

Biden brings exceptional foreign policy experience and he's Catholic. Both would help Obama.

Posted by: Christina | July 11, 2008 8:40 PM | Report abuse

For Democrat:
For your thought, I'm giving you my insights; Obama has a chance to win the Presidency if he picked Hilary Clinton as his VP. Picking John Edward, he has a 50-50 chance to win, and picking other contender or much lesser popular('08 Primary/Election)Demeocrat he is certain to lose.A divided party has no chance to win.
For Republican:
Mcain has to play his card well.Delay his choice until Obama pick his.He is certain to win if Obama choices the third choice I mentioned above.This is my prophecy. and please kept it secret until we have the result of the election.

Posted by: Jose P. Profeta | July 11, 2008 8:36 PM | Report abuse

JACK REED will be the VP

Posted by: bob North Smithfield | July 11, 2008 8:29 PM | Report abuse

Wouldn't it be cool to have a Kennedy in the White House again? I like Joe Kennedy for VP for Barack. Former Massachusetts Congressman. His nonprofit work, "Joe for Oil," is a timely issue now with gas prices the way they are. He's still got the charisma. Obama's been close to the Kennedys, and with Sen. Ted not in good health, the Kennedys haven't been vilified like they have been in the past. Hmmm?

Posted by: The Mike | July 11, 2008 8:15 PM | Report abuse

Giving you guys my insight about the Vice President bet are as follows;
For Democrats:
It will be a blunder for Obama if don't pick Hilary Clinton as his running mate. He will certainly lose the election as the Democrat voters will be divided. If he choice John Edward he may have a 50-50 chance to win. If, he choices the less popular democrat as his V.P., he will haunt himself for life as he is certain to lose.
For Republican:
Mcain has to play his card well in selecting his V.P. He must delay his decision of selecting his VP until Obama picked his VP ,for reasons I have stated above. I have read the destiny of people to lead this nation.

Posted by: Jose Profeta | July 11, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

A few weeks ago I thought the best thing for Obama to do would be to pick someone who has good national security credentials. But the more I think about it, the more I realize that if the election becomes about experience and national security, Obama will lose. Terrorism and the Iraq war are the two issues Obama polls worse than McCain on, despite people's anger at the Bush administration's handling of things. Picking someone like Kaine - someone fresh, relatively young, and who shares his vision - might even make MORE sense than picking someone older and who will draw attention to security and experience.

Posted by: cprach | July 11, 2008 8:03 PM | Report abuse

I think Sen. Obama is going to choose Sen. Clinton. It's an unbeatable ticket. Can you imagine the excitement and energy that would create at the convention? In an instant, all the Clinton supporters are on-board. The party is united. The Clinton machine can get into full gear and augment Obama's style of campaigning. No bad feelings and no days (or weeks) of media speculation if someone else were chosen for the spot.

I should note that I was a strong Obama supporter in the primaries, and got to the point where I would hit the mute button when Sen. Clinton was speaking. But choosing her is the expedient thing to do, and politics is the art of expediency. All the speculation about a co-presidency, Bill in the White House again, etc., etc. -- well, that can be taken care of another day, after Obama's sitting in the Oval Office. First things first.

I don't trust Sen. Clinton and find her insincere, but there's no denying that she's smart and thoroughly committed to certain issues, like health care. So who knows, maybe things will even work out well. One thing is certain: It can't be any worse than the duo that's there now.


Posted by: Alan | July 11, 2008 7:55 PM | Report abuse

agitpropigation -

As I diehard CLinton supporter, I can assure you that I DO NOT want Clinton to be offered a VP slot, and if one came, I hope she spits it back at him. It is bad enough that she is going around holding up his hand, and asking her supporters and fundraisers to throw a few measly bucks into his hat, but to be on his ticket, heaven forbid, what a disgusting thought?!

If CLinton were on the ticket, it would surely tempt a few of the more weak willed among us to actually vote the slimeball; it makes it infinitely easier to vote McCain or stay home if there was a clean break.

In fact, as a Clinton supporter, I wish and pray that NOBama picks Richardson; nothing would make it clearer to Clinton supporters how much empty talk it has been from NObama (since June 7) re: CLinton being great, etc; Patti Doyle, Richardson, would make it clear to Clinton supporters exactly where we stand with his slimeball campaign, and we can go our separate ways.

2012, here we come.

Posted by: intcamd1 | July 11, 2008 7:51 PM | Report abuse

Goracle is right. Bayh has more skeletons in northern Indiana than the Munsters in Muncie. Do your research Chris, before you place him #2. Besides being boring, he has verifiable ties to Detroit and Chicago "families". Go back to 1992. You will find out. Then tell us if you still think Obama will pick him. Go no further than St. Joseph County, IN.

Posted by: Well? | July 11, 2008 7:40 PM | Report abuse

Barack Obama VP victory list for Nov 2008 is breakdown to these 3 people;
Sam Nunn,
Joe Biden,
Chuck Hagel.

If Jim Webb is seriously opting out of this list then either of those 3 men above will complete BO credentials. I know Gov Richardson is very experience but we can't have two minorities race running for same ticket. Obama need someone who will help increase old white men & female voters towards him. BO need someone with foreign policy experience or military if not both.

Yes we can.
Yes we will.

Posted by: Dayshow | July 11, 2008 7:39 PM | Report abuse

Seriously, I think HonestAbe has it about right with some deletions: Biden refers to himself in the third person; that is never good. Sebelius reminds you of the coach of the Tennessee women's basketball team: Mr., er, Mrs. Pat Head. -- too scary for America right now. And of course HRC brings in more baggage than a jumbo jet, and would, as veep, re-activate that awful standing army of mischief makers and harpies (thankfully we haven't seen them on cable TV for some time) who would compete with BO's legitimate administration from day one. Who needs that.

Posted by: Broadway Joe | July 11, 2008 7:38 PM | Report abuse

I have changed my mind on Obama' VP several times, I have gone from Richardson to Webb to Hagel to Clark to Biden and now I think it will be Evan Bayh. Bayh is probably the absolute safest choice. Obama does not need to take a gamble. Bayh is rock solid, conservative, white guy from middle America, and a former Hillary supporter to boot with good foreign relations creds. Hard to see anything negative in Bayh other than he is kind of boring but that may not hurt him since Obama has plenty of1 charisma for both of them. Obama/Bayh 08!

Posted by: HonestAbe | July 11, 2008 7:32 PM | Report abuse

It is interesting that no one really agrees on anyone or anything re: VP picks.It's like picking the bottom five on the best-ever basketball team of ten players.McCain has no obvious 'lottery picks' and Obama has many picks that make sense.I really like the idea of Obama considering someone like Senator Hagel or former Defense Secretary Cohen.Neither would upset true mainstream Democrats but would upset McCain's need to tap into Reagan Democrats,Independents,and sensible Republicans.McCain should just stick with Lieberman and help shore up his weaknesses in parts of the northeast,even though this compromises his reachdown to the party base.Shake it up...this is America,people.Let's think outside the box for once.I hope you all enjoy the basketball references;I'm from Indiana.

Posted by: Biscuit | July 11, 2008 7:19 PM | Report abuse

My friends, I have what I believe to be BO's long list for veep. Because of its length, I can only share a few excerpts. The good news (for some) is HRC is on BO's list:

1. Mark Warner
2. Tim Kaine
3. Bob Richardson
4. Claire McCaskill
5. Wesley Clark

========

Warner has stated fairly firmly he is not interested. I suspect because the VA senate seat is so critical and Warner will help Obama anyway being such a popular figure there on the ballot in Nov.

Here are what I think Obama's VP finalists are:

-- Joe Biden
-- Evan Bayh
-- John Edwards
-- Bill Richardson
-- Brian Schwietzer
-- Wesley Clark
-- Chuck Hagel
-- Kathleen Sebelius
-- Claire McCaskill
-- Tim Kaine
-- Tom Daschle
-- Hillary Clinton

Hillary is probably not seriously under consideration but has to be on the list.

Posted by: HonestAbe | July 11, 2008 7:01 PM | Report abuse


I think
Obama will pick Richard Gephardt
and McCain will pick John Kasich.

Posted by: Florida Independent Voter | July 11, 2008 6:57 PM | Report abuse

"Forget about the governors and those who can win specific states for him (Anyway, history does not show that VPs win states for the ticket)."

Perhaps the reason is that Senators are tapped for VP a lot and Governors are tapped rarely. Given the fact that at the President level, Governors do a lot better than Senators (in the past eight presidential terms, exactly one has been served by a non-former governor).

Perhaps the same is true for the VP. It might be harder for a Senator who spends a lot of time in DC to deliver a state. A Governor, who is more intimate with his constituents, might be more successful at this task.

Posted by: DDAWD | July 11, 2008 6:57 PM | Report abuse

Obama needs a crossover appeal female - Why haven't we heard Christine Todd Whitman mentioned. Disillusioned with the Republican party, environmental background at EPA, Jersey is a big state.

9-11 worker safety comments hurt, but hard for McCain to attack her 9-11 comments because she was working for Bush at the time.

Posted by: DC Ex | July 11, 2008 6:53 PM | Report abuse

My friends, I have what I believe to be BO's long list for veep. Because of its length, I can only share a few excerpts. The good news (for some) is HRC is on BO's list:

1. Mark Warner
2. Tim Kaine
3. Bob Richardson
4. Claire McCaskill
5. Wesley Clark
* * * * * * *
301,139,940. J. Wayne Gacy
301,139,941. Robert Blake
301,139,942. C. VanBulow
301,139,943. S. Jackson-Lee
301,139,944. Harriet Christian
301,139,945. G. Ferraro
301,139,946. Rev. J. Jackson
301,139,947. H.R. Clinton

Posted by: Broadway Joe | July 11, 2008 6:49 PM | Report abuse

Obama has repeatedly stated that he will choose someone who has the credetials, competence, and compatable ideology to Obama's. My bet is on Biden.

Forget about the governors and those who can win specific states for him (Anyway, history does not show that VPs win states for the ticket). Obama will sweep the country and does not need anyone to help him win votes.

Munir

Posted by: Munir | July 11, 2008 6:43 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin NOT in the top 5? You gotta be kidding me.

On my excel spreadsheet analysis, she easily has more x's in her column than anyone.

People, she's got more experience than Obama, it's executive experience, she's good on energy, has integrity, beat the Repub machine in Alaska, guts, beauty, wonderful family.

If McCain picks her, he'll be ahead of Obama in the polls within two weeks easy.

Oh, did I add that she is great on TV and a former journalist who is younger than the Hollow Man.

This is such a no-brainer.

Mac, pick her and win.

Posted by: Tom | July 11, 2008 6:43 PM | Report abuse

I like Joe Biden for VP. Ed Rendell is a definite no-no. A lot of corruption here in PA and I'm sure he'll be part of it. Also, he was head of the DNC and has to appear in court in November on Clinton's case in LA re: irregularities in her Senate campaign funding. Maybe that's why she's not on Obama's list. If she was running for President and won, she would not have to face any charges. Now, who knows. Another woman, however, may anger her voters. Why, I don't know. This was an election and she lost. For some reason, they think Obama stole the election but that is not correct. I am white, 61 and even though a woman would be great, she had way too much baggage for me and, of course, there's .....Mr. C.

Posted by: ossilot | July 11, 2008 6:34 PM | Report abuse

So here is the thing with Sen. Clinton as VP: Her supporters are claiming the right of the VP slot because she came in second in the primaries. The fact is she lost. Adding the person you just beat on to your ticket doesn't make for good politics or good governance. Just look at Adams/Jefferson for that example. Do you think that John Kerry should have been the VP because he lost the 2004 election to Bush? Kerry won a greater percentage of the vote in the election than Clinton did in the primary, but do you honestly think that would have been a good arrangement? Clinton has lost...it does no good for the party, for Obama or frankly for Clinton to put her on the ticket. The sooner her supporters realize this and focus on winning for the Democratic Party, the sooner we can get this country going in the right direction.

Posted by: agitpropigation | July 11, 2008 6:29 PM | Report abuse

As an Alaskan, I can tell you that Sarah Palin would not move to Washington, DC - she'd demand that the U.S. White House and Capitol be moved to Wasilla, Alaska. She's hardly set foot in Alaska's capital since her election and was the only Alaskan governor to refuse to be sworn in in the capital.
Of course, before she became a governor a couple of years ago she WAS mayor of Wasilla RFD (population 7,028) and she's probably made a trip or two to Canada, so there is foreign policy experience on the resume....

GOP will go with Romney, McCain needs someone vigorous to spice up his fatigued and monotonous campaign. He should announce the pick soon so he can keep out of the media spotlight more himself - he comes across as bumbling and incoherent unless one of his mouthpieces, Graham or Lieberman, is nearby to interpret for him. An the blonde Barbie doll, who doesn't believe in contrasting colors, just perches around him like a mute sparrowhawk. Can't we get this over with soon?

Posted by: Mountain Lady | July 11, 2008 6:28 PM | Report abuse

It's the economy stupid...Mitt Romney wins hands down....a genius who knows how to solve problems...not Congress that makes problems.

Posted by: ralph j | July 11, 2008 6:26 PM | Report abuse

As I've written before, Bayh will be the choice. So, he should be number one on the line. Picking Bayh makes sense on so many levels that I don't think it's even a close call.

Posted by: Kevin | July 11, 2008 6:25 PM | Report abuse

With all due respect to everyone's comments including the author, there is only one choice for V.P. Hillary Clinton, period. With two horses finishing neck to neck in a re-play photo, we need both of those horses. As for former President Clinton, with this economy down the tubes; with foreigh policy a total wreck; etc.; I would think we might need "all" former Presidents back in the White House trying to clean up this mess. Hillary brings 18,000,000+ voters/workers to the ticket. This is a no brainer....and the decision should be announced before Sunday's papers.

Posted by: mfulcher | July 11, 2008 6:25 PM | Report abuse

I don't understand why you keep listing Bobby Jindal on McCain's short list. Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo had a great story about how Jindal participated in excorsims and wrote about it i favorably in an article. I can't imaging that as a great qualification for Vice President. Exorcisms in the White House? We haven't had so much fun since Mary Todd Lincoln's seances!

Posted by: Scott | July 11, 2008 6:23 PM | Report abuse

NObama should choose one of his prostitute media pals as his VP; take your pick - Rich, Matthews, Herbert, Dowd, Russert (oh wait, that one is dead), Olbermann,..

He owes these scumbags more than any one else, in his success in stealing the nomination. Now would be a fair pay up time.

He should then fill his cabinet with the remaining dirtbags from the above media bloviator list, and if any places are left, he should pack the rest with a few super"slimeball" delegates.

Match made in gutter, that would be, fittingly.

Posted by: intcamd1 | July 11, 2008 6:21 PM | Report abuse

Chris, you perceptively asked "does McCain really want to double down on his Washington ties given that Congress is as popular as used car salesman at the moment?" One could, and should, ask precisely the same question about Obama, yet 4 of your picks are senators - and the other, I think, may reflect local bias. Kaine in not well known outside VA and the beltway. Those considerations, I think, should make room for Richardson on the list. Foreign policy credentials in spades, Hispanic, executive experience, former Clintonite, could deliver a swing state, westerner, and has not been a DC insider for some time (but does have federal gov't experience).

Posted by: Bill | July 11, 2008 5:57 PM | Report abuse

Just took a look at the Penn Indictment story. It would appear on it's face that Rendell would be out.

Similarly Dodd's questionble mortgage loan would preclude him.

Squeaky Clean Barack...Squeaky Clean...

Important choice...

Posted by: Matt | July 11, 2008 5:47 PM | Report abuse

Romney? ROMNEY?! Are you kidding? This guy flips more often than Obama...and would pretty much lose the South and much of the lower Midwest for McCain. No thanks!

Posted by: say no to Romney | July 11, 2008 5:14 PM | Report abuse

Rendell as VP? Are you joking? Yesterday the PA Attorney General indicted 12 Dems from the state legislature for greedy political corruption. Now, investigators are rumored to be after Rendell for his cash for contracts philosophy, and his close ties to a convicted felon who has been indicted again. Rendell would never pass the vetting process nor the smell test, for that matter.

Posted by: Bitter small towner | July 11, 2008 5:13 PM | Report abuse

I am surprised that you don't put Ed Rendell on Obama's list

Posted by: rog | July 11, 2008 5:11 PM | Report abuse

Dark horse; Al Gore. He has prestege, experience, a change agenda. Why would he? Because the VP position would give him the bully pulpit to continue his environmental crusade.

Posted by: fulrich | July 11, 2008 5:07 PM | Report abuse

What about Sen. Bob Graham? He would deliver all of Florida - the most problematic of all states for Dems.

Posted by: Will G. from DC | July 11, 2008 5:07 PM | Report abuse

McCain - Romney
Obama - Kennedy (Caroline)

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2008 5:06 PM | Report abuse

Let's see: You pick Kaine to win Virginia. Kaine barely won against a Republican who couldn't show his face in public because of a lisp. He popularity rating is under 50% and dropping. He can't get a transportation deal done and actually is the opposite of charismatic. The only reason Virginia democrats would be happy about Kaine is the quicker we get rid of him the better.

Posted by: charlie | July 11, 2008 5:05 PM | Report abuse

I've thought for a long time that McCain would pick Ridge. He's successful, clean as a whistle, dependable, modest, trustworthy and smart. Plus, he truly can win PA for McCain. How? By winning pro-choice, moderate suburban women, that's how. For every voter McCain loses by picking Ridge, he'll gain three for showing he believes in a big tent and is still the Maverick voters want to see.

Posted by: Extreme Moderate | July 11, 2008 5:05 PM | Report abuse

If the D's were willing to tank on the NH Senate race, then would Jean Shaheen be a reasonable dark horse? An ex-Governor, comparable age / gender to Hillary, Hillary supporter, toss-up state, great campaigner. Even a victim of a dirty-trick campaign that led to actual convictions.

Posted by: jon | July 11, 2008 5:00 PM | Report abuse

We rejected her because she is opaque, shifting, willing to do or say anything - including adding to the lies, racist comments, and slander of Obama's opponents. She proved to be a horrible financial manager who sank her own campaign, a bad judge of charachter ( look who she hired and fired)is full of hubris that back-fired spectacularly, and is a dinasaur class politician of the worst, pandering, kind.

Only the racists, and misandrists want her. The majority of the nation REJECTED her!

Obama/Hagel
Obama/Sebilius
Obama/Gore

Notice Clinton's name isn't on my list.

Posted by: NO TO DINASAUR CLINTON | July 11, 2008 5:00 PM | Report abuse

For Sen. Obama:
Woopy Goldberg
Bill Cosby
Chris Rock

For Sen. McC:
Mitt Romney
Ms.Carly Fiorina
Sen. K. Bailey Hutchinson

Posted by: Pamela A. | July 11, 2008 4:57 PM | Report abuse

... and Pawlenty will win with McCain .. forget Romney and his baggage.

Posted by: Francisco Cardenas | July 11, 2008 4:57 PM | Report abuse

I think Hillary would be the best pick .. but I hope she doesn't get picked because it will make it difficult for her campaign to win after 4-years of McCain ... Edwards is a good example of how could-have-been-Veeps don't do well after a failed campaign.

Posted by: Francisco Cardenas | July 11, 2008 4:56 PM | Report abuse

For Obama either Biden, Kaine, Warner, or Bayh would make good choices.

I love the idea of McCain picking Romney, what a losing ticket!

For the record, please cease using the tired narrative that McCain somehow has a lock on the national security, international affairs vote. This notion has been thoroughly repudiated by McCain's actions in recent months. He has demonstrated repeatedly this year that he knows next to nothing about international relations, culture, history, politics, or even common manners. McCain asserts that he is an expert but his inability to even identify the key players in Middle East regional politics show conclusively that he would pose a distinct threat to our nation as president. His reckless penchant for threatening Iran whenever he is in political trouble is a danger for us all. So please, for the sake of informed discussion going forward, lets all agree to drop this false idea that McCain is some kind of a foreign policy expert. He is not.

Posted by: dee | July 11, 2008 4:55 PM | Report abuse

I wonder when we will hear about Senator Puple Lips sweet little real estate deal. You know the one where he was locked into a modestly below-average mortgage rate because he had "good credit". Nice job Barry Hussein, that's change I can believe in!

Posted by: Nadeem Zakaria | July 11, 2008 4:37 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin for VP, 2008! I've got to admit, I've got a bit of a political crush on her. This is a woman I'd be proud to have in the White House. She's by far the best pick for McCain: she has everything he needs to get all of those disaffected Hillary voters on his side, she's socially conservative enough for the social conservatives, she can battle with Obama for the young, attractive, and charismatic vote, and she has a crucial viewpoint to add to the global warming/energy debate. Why isn't she on the Top 5??

Posted by: Jodi | July 11, 2008 4:37 PM | Report abuse

DODD!

Think of the bumper sticker:

Vote For Obama
Dodd is my Co-Pilot

Posted by: Patricia | July 11, 2008 4:33 PM | Report abuse

Senator Obama visited me in the hospital after my brain surgery last year. He made me proud to be white.

Posted by: Linus Eric Wallgren | July 11, 2008 4:31 PM | Report abuse

It's Obama/Hagel 08!

Posted by: stearm | July 11, 2008 4:28 PM | Report abuse

Romney is the perfect GOP choice.

As he proved during the primaries, Slick Mitt will say anything to get elected.

He'll parrot McCain's line flawlessly - whatever it may be - without any, er, whining whatsoever.

Posted by: Brittman1 | July 11, 2008 4:25 PM | Report abuse

I think Biden would be a solid choice, I have never liked Richardson as a politician, but think he would help secure New Mexico and help in the west and in Florida. I think Ed Rendell is the best pick however. He is good attack dog, smart, would help secure Pennsylvania. Sam Nunn would be equally as good as Rendell, with Bob Barr in the mix and possibly winning Georgia, and perhaps helping regionally in North Carolina with some yellow dogs. My Dem List.

1. Tie - Rendell and Sam Nunn
2. Biden
3. Richardson Reluctantly because he helps Obama win.

Republican:

Only one name here Sarah Palin. It's a no brainer. McCain has to keep the gender vote close in oreder to win. Huchinson perhaps as well.

Posted by: Matt | July 11, 2008 4:25 PM | Report abuse

I think Bobby Jindal is hot!

Posted by: Dan | July 11, 2008 4:22 PM | Report abuse

all white folks is racist. they have ruined this country. but that alright cause we are taking over in novemeber. just like the inventer of the peanut said, george washington carver, the black man will not be free unitil he get up inside the white house.

Posted by: Lakisha | July 11, 2008 4:21 PM | Report abuse

Mnteng hits the Thune nail on the Quayle head. Bsimon dashes my hopes for Jack Kemp to make a comeback in the low world of politics. Several correctly point out that MDH helps McC more than anyone else, and I think that is true.

Someone asks about Chet Edwards. Capable, tough, and a military blue dog who chairs the mil contracts subcommittee. Most powerful Texan in the House - sits on both Budget and Appropriations. Used to represent Ft. Hood but DeLay gerrymandered it out of his district. One of the two Texans who beat DeLay on his 6 gerrymanders. Has remained tough for GIs and vets. Pro-choice blue dog who backed Iraq Military Authorization. Has voted with oil industry, but that is a prereq in TX, like voting for corn ethanol in IL.

Honors grad of Aggieland with Harvard MBA, earned not "legacied". GWB's Congressman, I kid you not, but only by geography.

Supported BHO before TX Primary and BHO carried the TX SSD that most closely compares to Chet's CD.

Posted by: MarkInAustin | July 11, 2008 3:41 PM | Report abuse

None of us know who Obama will choose but here's who he should choose: Stephanie Herseth Sandlin. She is the very personable and knowledgeable at-large congresswoman from South Dakota with huge crossover appeal. She could help with not only blue dogs but with the progressive base as well.

Posted by: Tom Wingfield | July 11, 2008 3:39 PM | Report abuse

How can it be that the only other viable candidate in the Democratic Primary race, the one person who received half of the popular vote, won the key swing states, posted double digit victories, inspired millions of new voters as well, and vigorously campaigned in every state of this country continues to find herself simply dismissed, dissed, discredited, demeaned, deplored, degregated, and ultimately disowned by fellow Democrats and Repbulicans alike? Senator Hillary Clinton is the only person who SHOULD be selected Obama's running mate. Half of the Democratic Party thinks so. The level of hatred toward this woman is unbelievable. I for one have had enough! This country is going to hell in a hand basket and the one person who has the smarts and savvy, the competency and courage, the experience and the background to actually do something about will probably be trashed again and tossed aside by our You-Tube, smashed media, throw-away society. Is it no wonder that her supporters are so angry and it's taking us awhile to 'get over it?'. We earnestly believe Hillary deserves the VP nod. Yes, we hope for that. For Obama not to select her as his running mate would be just one more 'terribly sad, sad state of affairs' for this country.

Posted by: mpwynn@spro.net | July 11, 2008 3:33 PM | Report abuse

great comments! on topic, insightful: where are all the crazies?

much as i love napolitano (i'm an arizonan: she's tough and smart and we love her here) i think people are distrustful of unmarried women (and to be fair, unmarried men). you've got to have your leave it to beaver family AND run a state, country, etc, or else you're some wacko that "real americans" can't identify with. so i don't think she's realistically a contender. but she'd definitely be a great vp.

Posted by: bethlf | July 11, 2008 3:28 PM | Report abuse

man-o-man, how close could we be to mentioning Elliot Spitzer !!! As the screw turns, you just never know, huh...

Posted by: pubichaironmycokecan | July 11, 2008 3:24 PM | Report abuse

[]--[][][]--[]----[][][][]------[][][]------[][][]-------[][][]---[]
-----[][][]---[]------[][][]------[][][]-------[][]-------[]
[]-----[]---OBAMA - LEAHY '08 ---[][]-[][]----[]--[]-----[][][]
---[][][]-----[][][][][]------[][]----[][]---[]-----[]---[][][]---[]
[]-----[][]-----[]---[][][]------[]----[][]--[][]---[]-----[]

The one VEEP possibility that Cheney would like to invite on one of his bird hunts. The ONLY democrat that fought the repugs when ALL others (well, maybe Durbin) hid in the dark with poll number's. So, in the same way repugs went outside the box and got an old-white-haired-guy from a small state to guide the young good looking guy in foreign affairs and policy. This election will still be about defense and foreign policy because there is a war going on and McCain is running as a warrier. Something is needed to beat back that fulcrum. Patrick Leahy hits on all cylinder's.

Posted by: angriestdogintheworld | July 11, 2008 3:19 PM | Report abuse

FlaLady: that is just one of the goofiest, most annoying and most off-based comments I've seen on a blog. And that is really saying something....

Posted by: anandamide | July 11, 2008 3:15 PM | Report abuse

Chris, that last sentence on your post doesn't make any sense. If the Obama campaign doesn't feel the need to add someone onto the ticket with security credentials and foreign policy know how, then why would they feel the need to pick someone from a battleground state? They'd effectively erase whatever good they'd gain in the state of Virginia by potential losses elsewhere. The campaign may make mistakes with regard to Obama's vlunerabilities, but don't imagine that they are cavlier about it.

Posted by: Justin | July 11, 2008 3:12 PM | Report abuse

As a native RI-er, I'd love to see Jack Reed get the nod but the gov of RI is a Republican so the replacement almost surely would be too. This has to factor into the choice.

Posted by: Spectator2 | July 11, 2008 3:11 PM | Report abuse

Chris, people who blog here "regularly" are paid bloggers so do not assume that what they have said reflects public opinion. If you want to know how voters think, please let them provide their IDs when they post a comment.

My email accounts are being hacked as well. Senator Obama should run a campaign--not a spying game.

So, people who hacked my email accounts know who I am. Yes I am watching this campaign closely for my students and the courses I am developing. I will be joining the Republican Party if Senator McCain picks Senator Romney.

That is the winning ticket.

Posted by: Premier | July 11, 2008 3:11 PM | Report abuse

GIVE THE VEEP NOD TO DODD -- BUT DON'T COUNT OUT HILL (FOR THE TOP OF THE TICKET, THAT IS)


Chris Dodd for veep.

It's a no-brainer. Sage wisdom; impeccable credentials on both the economy and national security; and, most of all, a mature father figure to balance Obama's youth and inexperience.

That's Obama's weakest area, and the others don't really help him in the "adult supervision" category.

On the downside, Obama would carry the Northeast anyway... but don't discount the impact of having a seasoned hand at Obama's side, someone who sticks to his principles and might be able to persuade Obama to start doing the same.

Of course, we're assuming here that Obama has the nomination wrapped up. I'm still not convinced. He's looking more and more like the Music Man. His recent shifts on FISA, church-state issues, and gun control, and his support to expand the death penalty despite concerns among his constituency about wrongful convictions, leave Obama vulnerable to a "draft Hillary" movement.

Or a Gore draft, for that matter.

Hillary's just as opportunistic as Obama, but she adheres to a set of core principles. She's tacked to the center-right for years. That's nothing new for her. But she's recently reinforced and enhanced her base and her reputation as a statesperson, while Obama's pliability on the issues has helped erode his.

Hillary's still the stronger candidate; Obama's lukewarm response to her entreaties for money help could persuade Hillary to intensify her covert campaign to wrest the nomination from him.

Memo to DNC: Put a contingency clause in that stadium lease agreement; If Hillary's strategy works, she won't be needing the cult of personality stagecraft.

Posted by: scrivener | July 11, 2008 3:06 PM | Report abuse

Why Biden and not Dodd?

I think the chattering class is underestimating the amount of anger over the FISA vote. It is not just a left-wing or right-wing thing, it is more of a core-principal thing like abortion. I am not saying it will sink Obama or McCain in the fall, but I do think it has woken a constituency politicians may have preferred to let slumber. No one was worried about the religious right in the seventies. Give this a few years. Dodd has been an outspoken advocate on civil liberties, especially on privacy issues in our technological age. Picking him as veep would be smarter than Biden and could calm the growing web-based backlash to Obama's support of FISA.

And I also don't understand why Richardson is never on the short five? Did I miss something?

Posted by: muD | July 11, 2008 3:05 PM | Report abuse

GIVE THE VEEP NOD TO DODD -- BUT DON'T COUNT OUT HILL (FOR THE TOP OF THE TICKET, THAT IS)


Chris Dodd for veep.

It's a no-brainer. Sage wisdom; impeccable credentials on both the economy and national security; and, most of all, a mature father figure to balance Obama's youth and inexperience.

That's Obama's weakest area, and the others don't really help him in the "adult supervision" category.

On the downside, Obama would carry the Northeast anyway... but don't discount the impact of having a seasoned hand at Obama's side, someone who sticks to his principles and might be able to persuade Obama to start doing the same.

Of course, we're assuming here that Obama has the nomination wrapped up. I'm still not convinced. He's looking more and more like the Music Man. His recent shifts on FISA, church-state issues, and gun control, and his support to expand the death penalty despite concerns about his constituency about wrongful convictions, leave Obama vulnerable to a "draft Hillary" movement.

Or a Gore draft, for that matter.

Hillary's just as opportunistic as Obama, but she adheres to a set of core principles. She's tacked to the center-right for years. That's nothing new for her. But she's recently reinforced and enhanced her base and per reputation as a statesperson, while Obama's pliability on the issues has helped erode his.

Hillary's still the stronger candidate; Obama's lukewarm response to her entreaties for money help could persuade Hillary to intensify her covert campaign to wrest the nomination from him.

Memo to DNC: Put a contingency clause in that stadium lease agreement; If Hillary 's strategy works, she won't be needing the cult of personality stagecraft.

Posted by: scrivener | July 11, 2008 3:01 PM | Report abuse

Tom Ridge? Really? Yeah, he was the first DHS head, but isn't the prevailing opinion that he did the job pretty badly?

Besides, I think you want to stay away from anyone who was that close to Bush.

Posted by: DDAWD | July 11, 2008 2:59 PM | Report abuse

CC, I agree with your #1 pick for Obama of Tim Kaine. Kaine is a popular governor of Va. and would definately help Obama in Va., and may help deliver Va. to Obama. It also helps Obama with the "God gap". Evan Bayh will likely not be picked by Obama, as he was a Clinton supporter & Mitch Daniels would likely be appointing Bayh's successor if he Obama/Bayh won. This won't happen. I know Bill Bolling takes over as Va. Governor if Kaine becomes VP, but the benefits of Kaine for Obama far outweighs that negative. Kat Sebelius is also a good choice for Obama. She has a better grasp on the economy than Obama but has no foreign policy experience. At least Kaine does have mission experience, and may appeal heavily to Catholics with his right win stance on abortion & gay marriage. I think Kaine is the front runner at this point.

For McCain, I still think Pawlenty is the front runner. I've said since June 2007 that if McCain won the GOP nominatin, a McCain/T-Paw ticket would be great for the GOP & good for America. Romney is a solid contender, also. Romney built his bona-fides on being a business minded who has made well in business and has a vast personal fortune to prove it. There is still the Mormon problem, though. Obama will use his race to excite blacks to the polls here in Southern states and by putting a Mormon on the ticket, McCain could alienate some Christian conservative voters crucial to states like South Carolina, North Carolina & Virginia. My homestate of NC should be safe, and SC should be very safe for McCain. Virginia could be, especially with Kaine as VP, very close. If Kaine is VP, Va. could be winnable for Obama with Romney as VP. However, Romney helps McCain in the other parts of the country: Michigan, Nevada, Oregon, New Mexico & Colorodo. Pawlenty, however, will help McCain in every state...especially Minn. which would put Minn. in play for McCain. Romney has the edge in money for McCain, but Pawlenty has the edge in dealing with the typical average voter. Pawlenty is also a great fundraiser, and is personal friends with McCain while Romney and McCain has personal problems with each other. For McCain, I don't like Jindal or Thune for VP. Ridge basicaly puts Pa. to McCain, but has quite a few different policy positions than McCain. He also deters social conservatives, which already is weary of McCain. Ridge supports abortion, McCain supports environmental ideals on global warming...this doesn't motivate the conservative base at all. No way for Ridge. Thune delivers nothing and then you have 2 senators on the same ticket...not a good thing. Where is the economic solutions? Jindal has been a gov. 6 months now in La. He's also very young and inexperienced, which is an argument McCain will use against Obama in this campaign. I think McCain's top choices are Pawlenty or Romney, and frankly CC, those are the only 2 on your list that McCain will likely pick. My dark horse is Alaska governor Sarah Palin, who would be a better pick than Romney in my view. She beat out an incumbent in a GOP primary & a tough former governor in a general election. She has a squeaky clean record & has ran on a reformer "clean up government" campaign and has actually governered that way. Plus, Palin is very popular with social conservatives and the fact that she's a woman could help McCain with women voters. Palin's fundraising credentials are a mystery to me, but being from the oil rich state of Alaska and beating out a current governor & longtime US senator in a GOP primary...I get the drift she can raise the money she needs to raise to get where she needs to be. She's also a personable woman and can attract the average voter well. Energy is also a major issue in this Presidential campaign, and Palin is governor of a very oil rich state and that gives her a leg up on the energy issue as well.

In my McCain short-list:
1. Tim Pawlenty
2. Sarah Palin
3. Charlie Crist
4. Mitt Romney
5. Mark Sanford

Obama's short list:
1. Tim Kaine
2. Kathleen Sebelius
3. Hillary Clinton
4. Sam Nunn
5. Chuck Hagel

It's hard to say at this point.


Posted by: reason | July 11, 2008 2:58 PM | Report abuse

Tim Kaine is a good governor, but there's 1 consideration against him. His Lt Gov, who would become Gov if BO + TK are elected, is Republican. He'd have a year in office (a good stepping-stone up the 2009 gubernatorial election in VA), which is something VA Dems don't want.

Posted by: Bernie in VA | July 11, 2008 2:57 PM | Report abuse

"What? No Edwards? He's still the least harmful choice for Obama. And it helps that he is a southern white man."

Actually I can see Edwards doing quite a bit of damage to Obama. I can easily see his personal press narrative as amalgamating, in a negative way, with the negative aspects of the press' established narrative with Obama.

Think about it: The media characature of Edwards is a young, generic-populist-empty-suit who gets $400 hair cuts every other day.

Tie that in with Obama's "elitism" and "far-left" record, and you have a dangerous coctail.

It would be a shiny new instrument for the media and they would hit every note.

Also, couple this with the fact that Edwards couldn't even deliver his home state of North Carolina in the 2004 general election, and it doesn't look good.

On the other side, he seems to have reinvented himself fairly well as a social/class champion, I just don't think he has the "umph" that overrides his negatives.

I say Gov. Mike Easely if you're going for an NC guy.

Posted by: Gavin | July 11, 2008 2:36 PM | Report abuse

Chris,

I want to know what you guys think of Gov. Mike Easeley? Is NC too farfeteched for the GE? I saw Mike speak in front of the NEA recently on CSPAN and he sounded pretty great at the podium.

Besides that, I love the Evan Bayh pick and I'm receptive to Tim Kaine, but I don't know as much about him as I do the other candidates.

My power ranking for this week:
Biden
Sebelius
Beyh
Kaine

On a side note, this whole Clinton thing is -really- starting to get me upset.

Let's be clear here: Clinton lost this election about 3 months before she actually quit, mathematically speaking (the ONLY metric that actually mattered; and guess what, counting caucuses Obama WON the pop. vote). She dragged out William Ayers and 'Shame on your Barack Obama' and all this crap in hopes of destroying him to get the nomination.

And then she has the "hutzpah" (as Harold Ickes infamously said at the MI/FL Rules Committee meeting) to essentially extort Obama into helpnig her fundraise? After she spent money of her own volition when she was facing mathematically 2% chance of winning??? I'm sorry, she gambled, and she lost.

I understand how it's in Barack's interest to help her, but the Clinton camps' tactics are still just as petty after the election as they were during it.

She has the gall to send her supporters out to leak news to the press: "Oh, Hillary supporters are really upset with Barack", "Barack really needs to step up to the plate and give Hillary a hand"?? Disgraceful.

Posted by: Gavin | July 11, 2008 2:32 PM | Report abuse

I just seen the poll results on Veep Peek, , As far as Obama Oddly enough Veep Peek has handicapped Wes Clark still near the top of the list. I am partial to Huckabee for McCains VP though. Huckabee is at the top of the poll list.!! Yeaaa! If you want to see the Veep Poll results I will leave the link Http://www.VeepPeek.com

Posted by: Mike | July 11, 2008 2:31 PM | Report abuse

mnteng writes
"And John Thune? Please. The last thing McC needs is J. Danforth Quayle #2."

Yes. My thoughts as well. What does Thune bring to McCain? Youth, guy-smiley good looks and... that's about it.

Posted by: bsimon | July 11, 2008 2:15 PM | Report abuse

Sebelius = "Tammy Wynette" among big democratic donors.

=======================

Sebelius would be a nightmare. She has zero foreign policy experience and zero chance of delivering a win in Kansas. She also flopped at her first chance to wow the nation during the Dem response to the State of the Union. She underwhelms me.

Posted by: Matthew, Philadelphia, PA | July 11, 2008 12:00 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2008 2:13 PM | Report abuse

If you are betting with your own money, here are the picks:

1) Bayh (3/1)
2) Clinton(4/1)
3) Sebeluis (5/1)
4) Kerry (6/1)
5) Rendell (10/1)
6) Richardson (12/1)
7) Biden (20/1)
8) Kaine (25/1)

Posted by: Fast Eddie Handicapper | July 11, 2008 2:06 PM | Report abuse

Chris's reasons for Tim Kaine are all good. Call me shallow, but I'm not sure "the Eyebrow" can go national . . .

Posted by: Jen | July 11, 2008 2:00 PM | Report abuse

Way to get out in front of the Kaine buzz, Chris. (*sarcasm*)

The only reasons his name has started to float are the following:

1) The press and Dem strategists nationwide think they have a shot at VA (they do, but...)
2) Northern VA liberals (i.e., everyone who works inside the beltway but lives out in the D.C. suburbs) can't help but salivate over reason #1, having a generally skewed perception of reality anyway but given reasonable optimism since Kaine successfully rode Mark Warner's coattails (barely) to the governorship.
3) Webb and Warner have both taken their names off the list, and since they are the only two credible picks from VA reason #1 is rendered null. However, their stepping aside has opened up a path for Kaine, who lacks both the experience and the centrist appeal of the other two.
4) Obama's other heavyweight picks are dropping off his list like flies (e.g. Rendell, Strickland), and the media is now beginning to ruminate about Obama's back bench out of necessity.

Your Republican list is pretty accurate, I think, except for Pawlenty (who could most probably not carry MN and seems to himself realize that he is not the serious contender /rising star that the media hyped him to be six months ago). But please step away from this Kaine nonesense --- it makes you seem unserious in your reporting.

Posted by: matt | July 11, 2008 1:57 PM | Report abuse

Democratic: Evan Bayh
Reason: Webb's out, Bayh's the best remaining combination of all-American whiteness, newness and security experience.

Republican: Kay Bailey Hutchison
Reason: McCain's best shot is to win over moderate women and disaffected Clinton supporters, and Hutchison is the best qualified woman to do it.

Posted by: MMitchell | July 11, 2008 1:53 PM | Report abuse

SCHWEITZER

Posted by: SCHWEITZER | July 11, 2008 1:52 PM | Report abuse

Whoa! Chris, I think you are way off on the Dem side today. HRC is no longer in contention - Bill is too much of a liability. And choosing another woman would be seen as a slap in the face to HRC so you can eliminate Sebelius too. (Obama's praise of her sealed that for me - he'd have been silent on her if she were still in the running)

Biden? Yes, I think he is still a contender. I can see him as VP or Secretary of State.

The same goes for Bill Richardson who should also be on the list. His resume is solid and he is a team player.

Continuing the team of rivals approach, Chris Dodd should also be on the list. He was the first of the other Dem candidates to endorse Obama and has a solid reputation with labor and the liberal blogs and he is fluent in Spanish. But I see Secretary of Labor in his future.

The dark horse who could emerge is Jack Reed. Solid military background, Catholic, experienced but not someone who will overshadow Obama.

He is my pick to click.

Posted by: PeninsulaMatt | July 11, 2008 1:41 PM | Report abuse

For all of you Hillary supporters: come on, sweeties. I know I didn't fight for equal rights, or do any time in the trenches or anything, but I was a heck of a community organizer (whatever that is). I have to admit, it's a good thing Emil Jones, Jr. let me take credit for all of the legislation he authored in Illinois or my thin resume would be nonexistent! LOL!! But, hey, that's what friends are for, at least until the bus comes along. Dean, Pelosi, Moveon.org, and all the rest have pushed for me, too, along with the MSM. (A shout out to my homey, Olbermann, woo, woo!) But, sweeties, the point is this: I stole this election fair and square. Send me your money, vote for me and I might even give your girl Hillary a job writing up some healthcare legislation. Don't expect her to get too close to the White House, though; to be honest, Michelle wants to pick out the drapes herself and she just doesn't like Hillary. Me, I think she's likeable enough, but--well, you know women. So stop crying and get over it. You're going to have to settle for me, the unqualified, inexperienced guy. But, let's be real: I'm a Democrat and it's a rule, isn't it? I mean, you have to fall in line and vote for me, don't you?

===============================

Wow, great way to prove that you're not being overly dramatic and emotional (insert other random demeaning cliches about women at will) about all this..

Posted by: Another Fla Lady | July 11, 2008 1:37 PM | Report abuse

Who is VP is not going to win the election for either of them so why all the fuss so many weeks before a decision is going to be made.

The candidates havent yet managed to define themselves, which is a lot bigger issue.

Posted by: nclwtk | July 11, 2008 1:31 PM | Report abuse

how about governor john corzine of new jersey for the dems, i would vote for obama if he picked him. anything to get corzine out of my home state.he would be willing to pay for the job, and pay off hillarys debt too!!!never mind that he is an idiot, we have survived idiots before. for the republicans, mayor bloomberg of new york city is a good choice, huckabee would lock up the south, pawlenty i don't think would be able to carry minnesota for mccain, the people out there always vote strange [ see jesse ventura] and do the opposite of what they should do. for mccain to win he needs to pick up a large blue state, michigan or wisconsin, plus keep the south and rocky mountain states. his pick will depend on who obama picks.

Posted by: jim | July 11, 2008 1:29 PM | Report abuse

Governor Pawlenty keeps telling the Minnesota press that he is not being vetted for vice president. Our press dutifully repeats that, but I can't imagine anyone actually believes him.

Posted by: linda higgins | July 11, 2008 1:27 PM | Report abuse

For all of you Hillary supporters: come on, sweeties. I know I didn't fight for equal rights, or do any time in the trenches or anything, but I was a heck of a community organizer (whatever that is). I have to admit, it's a good thing Emil Jones, Jr. let me take credit for all of the legislation he authored in Illinois or my thin resume would be nonexistent! LOL!! But, hey, that's what friends are for, at least until the bus comes along. Dean, Pelosi, Moveon.org, and all the rest have pushed for me, too, along with the MSM. (A shout out to my homey, Olbermann, woo, woo!) But, sweeties, the point is this: I stole this election fair and square. Send me your money, vote for me and I might even give your girl Hillary a job writing up some healthcare legislation. Don't expect her to get too close to the White House, though; to be honest, Michelle wants to pick out the drapes herself and she just doesn't like Hillary. Me, I think she's likeable enough, but--well, you know women. So stop crying and get over it. You're going to have to settle for me, the unqualified, inexperienced guy. But, let's be real: I'm a Democrat and it's a rule, isn't it? I mean, you have to fall in line and vote for me, don't you?

Posted by: FlaLady | July 11, 2008 1:21 PM | Report abuse

This should be a non-issue. If Obama cannot beat the doddering McCain with the economy in the dumper and a quagmire in Iraq, regardless of who the running mates are, the Dems should immediately fold their tent.

Posted by: Spectator2 | July 11, 2008 1:20 PM | Report abuse

I'm in the anyone but Hillary camp for VP. I don't think it improves Obama's numbers, and makes for a difficulty for Obama to have his own agenda with two big names taking up so much oxygen. I love MBW suggestions for the other women. Sebellius would be good. Gregoire is running for Gov of Washington against a strong Republican and the dems don't want to lose that state.

I don't see why Edwards isn't on the list? He has integrity and their seems to be a friendship there. Biden is my favorite choice. I've heard that one dark horse is Chet Edwards from Texas. Anyone know anything about him?

Posted by: Sunshine | July 11, 2008 1:15 PM | Report abuse

What about Jack Reed? He seems tailor made to be VP. Military experience, well-versed on foreign policy, in line with Obama on most issues (but see FISA), and even "boring."

Posted by: Jim | July 11, 2008 1:02 PM | Report abuse

Ah, yes. Another Fix post full of conventional wisdom. I wonder if that CW figured on Caroline Kennedy being part of BHO's vetting team. I don't remember CW correctly predicting the last 4 sitting VPs -- Cheney, Gore, Quayle, GHWB -- and I'm not old enough to remember CW before that.

It is interesting that The Fix picks 4 present or former governors for McC, but only 2 for BHO. Doesn't the CW say that BHO needs more executive experience on the ticket than McC?

And John Thune? Please. The last thing McC needs is J. Danforth Quayle #2.

Posted by: mnteng | July 11, 2008 1:01 PM | Report abuse

Dems -- If Obama wants his Veep to play the attack dog, then he wants Biden -- smart, quick on his feet, and fearless. If Obama wants a solid policy guy, Nunn is an inspired choice -- as solid a pro as you will find. And if Obama wants an experienced utility player, Richardson is the man.
Putting Clinton on the ticket would be like moving next door to a radioactive toxic waste dump -- seems like a great deal at the time, but that warm glow will give you more than a nice tan.

GOP -- I like Palin a LOT. And Colin Powell -- you couldn't ask for a more loyal soldier (maybe TOO loyal), and he'd make as good a President as anyone. Won't happen though. It'll be one of the white guys.

Posted by: Who The Hell Knows? | July 11, 2008 12:59 PM | Report abuse

No one has mentioned, including the Fix himself, that taking Bayh from the Senate jeopardizes Dem control.

Put your thinking caps on please. Indiana is a red state with a republican governor that will elect a republican in Bayh's place if he becomes VP.

Whatever his bona fides, that ain't gonna happen if Obama wants to govern.

Posted by: Bayh is out | July 11, 2008 12:50 PM | Report abuse

Where is John Kerry on your Dems' Veepstakes lists? It would be the real "Dream Ticket." The way he and the Big O flip-flop back and forth, they could literally be on both sides of most issues at the same time!
-Wm Tate,
http://www.atimelikethis.us/

Posted by: Wm Tate | July 11, 2008 12:49 PM | Report abuse

MBW

My guess is that Caroline K. is going to run next year and seeing as her uncle may unfortunately be seeing his career wrapping up over the next decade...would it not be fantastic to see her move to my home state of Massachusetts and run.

I can see a really cool future there.

and mark my words Fiorino...jerk or not is going to have a future in the republican party that is quite strong.

Posted by: DL Willson | July 11, 2008 12:39 PM | Report abuse

I believe Bill Richardson would be Obama's best choice for all the reasons stated already, with Chuck Hagel as an interesting dark horse.

Posted by: Greg Luth | July 11, 2008 12:38 PM | Report abuse

Anybody but Huckabee is a losing ticket for McCain.

Posted by: James | July 11, 2008 12:36 PM | Report abuse

It may be fun to guess the VP but the VP does little to win voters, you either like the presidential candidate or you don't. Having Pawlenty, Crist or Kaine, Bayh doesn't mean you can win the state they are from. What makes a good VP is one that is good on camera, good on the campaign trail, stays on message and can attack the opposing candidates. What makes bad VP is one that takes the shine off of the presidential candidate.

Mitt Romney looks so much better campaigning than McCain that he will out shine McCain, making him look old and confused. When the VP looks like the better of the two, not good.

Hillary Clinton just too much Clintons for Obama campaign to control plus as stated the sound bites showing up in McCain ads. Hillary would be a terrible choice. The buy one get one free was good in the 90's not so good now.

Posted by: Scott | July 11, 2008 12:33 PM | Report abuse

Kathleen Sebelius
Blanche Lincoln
Janet Napolitano
Christine Gregoire

Hillary Clinton cracked the door open for women....now we just need her to step aside so someone new can actually charge through it.

Posted by: MBW | July 11, 2008 12:33 PM | Report abuse

You know what would be rich?

Rich (by marriage) McCain picking Richer (by wheeling & dealing) Romney to help persuade the non-rich that if we just let them make the rich even richer, everything will work out fine for the non-rich.

That's rich.

Posted by: FlownOver | July 11, 2008 12:32 PM | Report abuse


Democrats need to get serious about bringing up the next generation of female politicians.

Hillary Clinton has had her moment in the spotlight. It's time to clear a path for other people. If anything, Hillary Clinton has taken up all the oxygen for any other up-and-coming women in the party.

Now we should should start grooming the next crop: Kathleen Sebelius, Janet Napolitano, Blanche Lincoln, Christine Gregoire, etc.

Posted by: MBW | July 11, 2008 12:28 PM | Report abuse

Any one but Evita!

Posted by: Miri | July 11, 2008 12:24 PM | Report abuse

whoops! I misremembered. The 'initiation' fee is $3.5 to 10 Million. How silly of me to think it was down in the 6-figure range:

http://travel.nytimes.com/2006/03/05/magazine/305vacation.1.html

Posted by: bsimon | July 11, 2008 12:22 PM | Report abuse

Thanks for the line, Chris!

I third or fourth the comment about Richardson, he'd be my pick. What is his relationship with the Obama camp?

Also, would be helpful to mention who these people are briefly (ie Indiana senator or former Iowa governor), in case I don't get the veepstakes line every week to memorize their biographies.

Posted by: danj | July 11, 2008 12:17 PM | Report abuse

mark in austin writes
"So McC will not pick Gov. Palin, a true reformer, and my fave. Maybe he could consider one of my all time faves, Jack Kemp."

Last time I heard anything about Kemp, who is definitely deserving of a political "where are they now?" review, it was in an article discussing luxury vacation home clubs. He is apparently heavily involved in one of these groups where you buy in for big bucks (like $250K plus), pay a monthly maintenance fee, and share a bunch of luxury vacation homes around the world. He was pictured on a gulfstream jet, en route between some of the properties. I think its safe to say he's out of politics for good.

Posted by: bsimon | July 11, 2008 12:17 PM | Report abuse

Mark Warner remains the logical choice.

Warner is compatible with Obama. Moreover, Warner is qualified to be President.

Warner could not be anything but committed at the Virginia convention.

Obama has not wanted his choice to be telegraphed.

So at a time of Obama's choosing, Warner will be asked again.

Warner cannot refuse. This is something Warner's children and Virginia Democrats will have to accept.

Posted by: dpl2102 | July 11, 2008 12:14 PM | Report abuse

Kaine is #1 on Obama's VP list? Chris, you're kidding, right?

Posted by: brian | July 11, 2008 12:06 PM | Report abuse

Sebelius would be a nightmare. She has zero foreign policy experience and zero chance of delivering a win in Kansas. She also flopped at her first chance to wow the nation during the Dem response to the State of the Union. She underwhelms me.

Posted by: Matthew, Philadelphia, PA | July 11, 2008 12:00 PM | Report abuse

Dems - Sam Nunn

Repukes - Don't matter, they're gonna get their A$$es waxed.

Posted by: austinbigboy | July 11, 2008 12:00 PM | Report abuse

So McC will not pick Gov. Palin, a true reformer, and my fave. Maybe he could consider one of my all time faves, Jack Kemp.

JB looks so much better for BHO than Kaine both as a candidate and as the man a heartbeat from the presidency that I cannot imagine Kaine at #1. For those who think they might not get along, BHO was a protege of both Lugar and JB and when you hear JB defend BHO you're hearing a better defense than BHO can ever put up for himself - largely b/c no one ever sounds right tooting his own horn. Think RG when you think tooters.

Posted by: MarkInAustin | July 11, 2008 11:56 AM | Report abuse

No Mike Huckabee for the Republicans feels like and oversight. Not one of the other candidates mentioned has his appeal to Southern voters, particularly evangelicals. If one of McCain's largest problems is his "own" conservative base why not choose Huckabee and sure up his numbers in Southern states. That way McCain can focus on the West & Midwest and Huckabee can try to stop the bleeding in the South. Huckabee also has "executive experience" as Governor and bring some economic chops to the table.
Maybe that makes too much sense.

Posted by: JNoel002 | July 11, 2008 11:50 AM | Report abuse

I don't see a McCain/Romney and definitely not an Obama/Clinton ticket. Why bother attacking the candidate of the other party when you can let his VP pick do the trash talking? I'm pretty sure Hillary will star in the RNC October offensive anyway, it just seems like a very bad idea to have nationwide ads with your VP going: "I have a lifetime of experience that I will bring to the White House. I know Senator McCain has a lifetime of experience that he will bring to the White House. And Senator Obama has a speech he gave in 2002". There's just too many soundbites around (on both sides) that can be (ab)used..

Posted by: JHH | July 11, 2008 11:46 AM | Report abuse

If Obama picks Joe Biden as VP then we will vote for him on behalf of Joe. Obama himself is all smoke and mirrors, as people are beginning to find out. Same-old, same-old, but without experience.

Saying that Joe would have to be on a tight leash is an insult to someone of his stature. We like Joe's spontaniety. He's real.

Jackson's comment about cutting Obama's nuts off is an insult. Saying that he is clean and articulate is not. I wouldn't take it as an insult if someone referred to me that way. You people give too much credence to stuff posted on "Tattletube". Who are you, a bunch of sheep?

Joe Biden should be on the top of this ticket.

Posted by: cacatua | July 11, 2008 11:44 AM | Report abuse

If you're going to pick anyone from Florida Graham is hands down the best pick...
First as for Crist he beat Crist in 98 with over 60% of the vote. Plus, when your whole campaign is going to be run arguing that the other guy (obama) doesn't have enough experience how can you add to the ticket a guy who has less (not quite 2 years as Gov. - Graham had two full terms of Governor and 3 terms as Senator) Finally, if you take Crist out of Florida, nobody would be talking about him (Graham is significant on his foreign policy chops alone nevermind the geography)
Second, Nelson has a luke warm appeal to Florida dems and just hasn't been able to reach the level of reverance as Graham or Lawton Chiles did. Plus, he's done nothing to make him stand out and by selecting him the Dems would lose a Senate seat. He just doesn't add much and if you're going to pick someone for the sake of winning Florida he's not even the best pick in the state.

Posted by: FLDEM08 | July 11, 2008 11:42 AM | Report abuse

Good Veep lists. I agree about Romney--he is absolutely the best choice with our tanking economy. Choosing him is a no-brainer.

Posted by: Shelby | July 11, 2008 11:42 AM | Report abuse

I think Kaine is good. But why is Hagel not on the list for Obama?

Posted by: tango | July 11, 2008 11:41 AM | Report abuse

Where's Bill Richardson? I think he would make a great pick; experience, geography, known on the national scene...

Posted by: Liz | July 11, 2008 11:38 AM | Report abuse

Bayh is tied to the DLC anchor.
Picking him would sour Obama's main point: "This is a time for change."

Posted by: Bayh ??? | July 11, 2008 11:37 AM | Report abuse

I'm glad to see Biden finally on the line. I wish I knew the Fix's reason for having omitted him until now and just now putting him on. Insight, please. Was it his latest MTP appearance?

Also, I'm surprised to see Crist drop off the GOP line. That would sure make his upcoming marriage pointless, no? I can't see how Thune ranks above Crist.

Posted by: Optimyst | July 11, 2008 11:35 AM | Report abuse

Mitt Romney or Ms. Firona for Rep. because they have economic exp..

Sen. Obama should pick a Jewish VP. He got 70% of the Jewish support during the primary, and he could solidify the Jewish votes further if he chooses a Jewish VP. Besides, He owes that much to them for all the support the Jews and Israel have given him in is rise to power.

Posted by: Bruno S. | July 11, 2008 11:33 AM | Report abuse

Bill Nelson,Joe Biden,and Ed Rendell are three of the best choices for Obama's VP.Definitely throw out Evan Bayh.Bill Richardson,John Edwards,and Kathleen Sebelius are suspect but not completely unreasonable choices.The jury is still out on Hillary but the Patty Solis issue looms large against her.Has anyone considered former Clinton Defense Secretary William Cohen? Think about it.The question,though,is if Mr.Cohen would consider the position.Any thoughts on this fellow pundits?

Posted by: Biscuit | July 11, 2008 11:32 AM | Report abuse

I think all of these "smaller known" candidates...like Sebelius, or Kaine or the others are hard to see after there have been so many on a national stage looking like possible "Presidents" for so long.

I don't think this election is the same as Bush...who had his dad's name... or Gore or Kerry...who had "historys"...ya know?

and this isn't an incumbent running on "change" ...the "change" issue is not as much in the people (becasue both would be changed people) but the stances that are the bigger "change" issue.

So I just can't see how someone like Sebelius...or Kaine...or even Graham...

Most Americans don't see them as strong choices...not to go to the LCD but I think it is more basic than this inside the beltway kind of knowledge...

I don't see they bring more to an "Obama" ticket... than a name that the "market" already sees as a well known leader...ya know?

Posted by: DL Willson | July 11, 2008 11:27 AM | Report abuse

I agree...if it doesn't end up Biden...mysecond long shot bet but still second is Hillary VP, Biden sec of state

but he would almost have to announce both of those early and quickly.

Posted by: DL Willson | July 11, 2008 11:18 AM | Report abuse

I'm not at all disagreeing DL. I'm not sure Joe should be VP, but I'm sure he's one of the best choices. I'm also sure they need to bring him into this administration.

Posted by: Goracle | July 11, 2008 11:16 AM | Report abuse

Biden's a good pick on paper (definitely ready to be President which has to be the most important qualification) but if "do no harm" is not the number one rule for a VP pick its gotta be near the top and its tough to not see Biden violating that one. Great attack dog but.....
On a personal level you'd also wonder how well Obama would work with him. As someone who genuinely knows an awful lot but also thinks he knows more - its tough to see Biden quietly going along with disagreemtns with the President Obama.
Also, he doesn't add much on the economics side - and electorally bring the great state of Deleware into the Dem's column (where it is regardless) is a wash.
Best - though very little talked about pick - I would agree is Bob Graham. Also prepared to take the office, solid solid solid foreign policy/intelligence experience, as for the economy you just need to reference how the state of Florida did under his stewardship as Governor (which is Executive experience not just senatorial) to answer that questions. And after I think almost four decades of public service there's not one story questioning the ethics of Graham or his family so he nails the do no harm rule.
Finally, on a personal level you can just see him slide right into that staunch supporter and advocate of the presidents agenda role suberbly and with no political agenda of his own would most importantly leave the President with a VP he could trust and depend on. Bob Graham's the pick

Posted by: VPhero | July 11, 2008 11:14 AM | Report abuse

Goracle

I agree Biden has weaknesses... obviously...but with his long career to have those as the weaknesses against all the rest...

I think it's really hard to see that outweighing it...

just by lining up pros and cons...

I just think if Obama came out and said

here is my VP Biden one week...

then at the convention was to announce Hillary as Sec. of State (I doubt but that would be a killer) ...let McCain announce his VP and the day after announce Edwards as Atty General...
Hagel as Homeland Security or something...the day after that...Bloomberg Sec of treasury, etc...

and suddenly appear with that "team" taking from Lincoln's "team of Rivals"

he would crush the opposition.

and the VP debate would be unbelievable.

Get two members of the team together for different events...

It would be a trouncing.

Posted by: DL Willson | July 11, 2008 11:13 AM | Report abuse

DL,

You're right he should name his cabinet, if not at once, as he goes he should drop names of who's in.

Beth,

As a former Clinton supporter, I have to say, other Clinton supporters need to get over it. In 2000, people angered at the Clinton-Gore administration on the left threw the election to Bush. We got the last 8 years in return. Look, I like Hillary a lot, but the race was truly over when she lost like 12 primaries in a row. No, he didn't have "enough" delegates, and sure, she was able to win rust-belt states, but she was always supposed to. All the media pointed out was the truth: even with double-digit wins in PA and OH, even with 30 point wins in places like KY and WV, Hillary couldn't catch him. Truth be known, she didn't!

Posted by: Goracle | July 11, 2008 11:08 AM | Report abuse

If obama was smart as Mccain is said to be waiting to announce (a probably lack luster announcement of Romney as) his VP.

Obama the day after should announce Edwards as the guy who will be reforming the damage to our justice system and government thatthe Attorney general's office that the Bush administration did.

Posted by: DL Willson | July 11, 2008 11:06 AM | Report abuse

DLWilson,

Biden would be a wonderful choice overall, but don't leave off the obvious here.

-He's screwed up big time in the past on the trail. VP's can't do this.

-He sponsored the bankruptcy bill. The bill is the worst piece of legislation a Dem has sponsored Post-Iraq Vote.

Posted by: Goracle | July 11, 2008 11:03 AM | Report abuse

Goracle

I agree...
I think honestly...how anyone can't tell he is going to be the one to fix the Attorney general's office after the disaster of the last few years.

Obama would be smart to announce some of his cabinet just before or after McCain announces his VP.

Posted by: DL Willson | July 11, 2008 11:03 AM | Report abuse

I think that though Obama doesn't think he "owes" the Clintons anything so he doesn't have to worry about picking Sibelius misses the point. Her supporters will be livid if he picks a woman other than Hillary. And many of them are already pretty steamed that lite-boy got selected -- not because their candidate lost, but because of the march to coronation in the media and the constant drumbeat for her to withdraw long before the chosen one had been ... chosen.

Posted by: Beth | July 11, 2008 11:02 AM | Report abuse

I think McCain needs to pick a VP based on economic prowess. The question is whether a guy like Romney will look like an economic guru to voters. Yes, he made a ton of cash in venture capital. Does being a succesful capitalist make one an economic heavyweight? Not necessarily. Given the condition in which Romney left Mass, he might not be the sidekick McCain needs.

Posted by: bsimon | July 11, 2008 11:02 AM | Report abuse

BigRed,

Evan Bayh attempted a run for President in 2007. He took one weekend trip to New Hampshire, got like 20 people at his event. The same weekend, Obama got several thousand in New Hampshire. Bayh went home, wet his bed, and dropped out.

John Edwards has twice finished second in the Iowa Caucus (defeating Hillary Clinton this time I might add). He raised tens of millions (which in a normal election would have made him a heavyweight). In 2004, he won the South Carolina primary. He continues to hold high approval ratings, as does his popular wife. In 2004, he went through this process, albeit not successfully, as the VP Nominee.

You tell me who sounds like the better Veep?

Sure, Edwards has lots of his own issues, and probably shouldn't be the pick, but he smokes "Lightweight Bayh."

Posted by: Goracle | July 11, 2008 10:59 AM | Report abuse

I disagree with the commenter on Biden being too old and the whole executive experience thing...

I really don't think the "executive experience thing" comes into voters minds when they are about to choose as much as everyone thinks it does.

I think people have watched Biden on Meet the Press and every other show known to man for the past few years as the most prominent face arguing against the Bush administration and that's what they remember...

loud mouthed...sometimes a little pompous but mostly as the face of the side against the Bush administration in their living rooms for the past 6 years.

and the fact that most people think of him as really smart on Iraq, the middle east Pakistan, afghanistan and this bad situation...whether they agree with his "plan" details or not...

I just can't see how that (especially now with McCain screwing up left and right on the economy) just throws the margins of choices...way in Biden's favor at this point.

Posted by: DL Willson | July 11, 2008 10:54 AM | Report abuse

You're pretty right about what you write, from one Pennsylvanian to another.

One problem: Evan Bayh. Did you see how effective he was for Hillary? Her campaign died in Indiana. Did you see how well he did in his run for President? He made Tom Vilsack's campaign seem successful.

There are other negatives about him that would show up in vetting, but the guy's a dud as VP. He'd make 2004 Edwards look like a powerhouse. 2008 Edwards eats him for lunch.

Posted by: Goracle | July 11, 2008 10:53 AM | Report abuse

"Evan Bayh is John Edwards lite. He is a pretty face who is loved in his home state. Beyond that, regardless of experience, I don't think he'll be of much assistance."

If anything, you have this backwards. Edwards has significantly less experience than Bayh. Bayh has won statewide in Indiana 5 times. Edwards won North Carolin once, failed to deliver his state for John Kerry in 2004, and would have really struggled to keep his Senate seat had he even bothered to try.

Edwards is the lightweight.

Posted by: BigRed | July 11, 2008 10:52 AM | Report abuse

So far Yuck the whole bunch of Veep choices
suck just like Marxist Socialist Democrat
Liberal Loser Barack Hussein Obama and
Neo Con John McCain suck as well. Dump both
McCain and Gurly Man Obama. Throw Obama and
McCain and the whole Democratic Party and
Republican Party Leadership Under the Bus!

Posted by: Sherry Kay | July 11, 2008 10:45 AM | Report abuse

On the Republican side, I think your top two are pretty accurate, but Charlie Crist should be above the other three you have listed. Just the possibility of delivering Florida has to have him in the top 5.

I grew up in PA when Ridge was governor and I have a lot of respect for him even though I'm a Democrat, but I don't think there is any way he gets picked for the VP. I think his recent lobbying activities and his pro-choice beliefs both pretty much disqualify him.

On the Dem. side, I really like Biden and gave money to his campaign before he dropped out, but I think it is highly unlikely that he is picked. He has no executive experience, he's been in the Senate forever and he is too old. He doesn't fit in well with Obama's change message. Plus, Delaware is pretty insignificant.

I think there is no way Hillary gets offered the VP either. The last thing an Obama administration needs is the power hungry Clintons and Bill's baggage.

I would have Evan Bayh as # 1. He's got the resume, appeals to centrists and working class voters, comes from a winnable "red" state, and helps heal the Hillary rift.

Posted by: BigRed | July 11, 2008 10:44 AM | Report abuse

Dear Fiorina fans:

You do know that when Fiorina "stepped down" (was forced out) as Hewlett-Packard CEO, the employees danced in their cubicles, right? You do know that she was a monstrously unsuccessful CEO, right?

http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=138854&cid=11617643
http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=138854&cid=11617724

McCain-Fiorina 2008 means "start preparing for Obama's inauguration now".

Posted by: Yet Another Obama Voter | July 11, 2008 10:43 AM | Report abuse

Delaware and Virginia may not touch but they are "bordering"...sorry I did not take it in the literal sense...a few miles away. I guess I should have been clearer.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2008 10:41 AM | Report abuse

Please stop with the Richardson plugs- the guys a joke. He actually said that "God wants Iowa first," which even made the Iowans in Sioux City laugh at him. The guy is about as Presidential ESPN's John Kruk- and I may be insulting Kruk by saying that!

Please, don't spout me off his resume- could you see the guy debating Mitt Romney? It would make the beating Edwards took 4 years ago look tame. Please research his time at the Energy Department- the security breaches and day to day issues of his tenure. The GOP would easily label him as part of why your gas is $4 and counting.

As for Biden, I like him, but let's not declare him saviour of our party. This guy has a history of foot-in-mouth, and despite one other commenter's assertment, does not live in a Virginia bordering state. Additionally, Biden's economic record isn't as solid as one might think- see his sponsorship of the bankruptcy bill.

Posted by: Goracle | July 11, 2008 10:38 AM | Report abuse

Here's a stab at the dem administration...and I use to think Fiorina was a good choice for McCain but not anymore...I think he'll pick Mitt or Pawlenty)

but for the dems

Obama
Biden VP (Hillary second...but as I said earlier...I think even that is a dark horse because of her unfortunately long list of dead witness garbage and people's willing to look to conspiracies)

Atty General Edwards...done deal...has to be.

Sec of State is going to boe offered to Hillary (she can shore up more foreign policy and that way she makes sure Richardson doesn't get it) if not then Richardson and Hillary will become the Queen of congress so to speak...

Sec. of Defense Gates...if not then Clark, and or Hagel

Homeland Security Hagel, Dodd or Clark...longshot Webb


Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2008 10:36 AM | Report abuse

Whatever happened to Mike Bloomberg? He's still my #1.

Posted by: Claudius | July 11, 2008 10:36 AM | Report abuse

Evan Bayh is John Edwards lite. He is a pretty face who is loved in his home state. Beyond that, regardless of experience, I don't think he'll be of much assistance. With that said, a Bayh/Romney debate would be hilarious! What a hair and makeup budget that would have!

That is *not* the way to woo women voters, folks.

As others have pointed out, you have failed to mention Bill Richardson. He did, after all, just get a haircut.

Richardson and Kaine help with the electoral map. Kaine's Harvard connection is vital -- it seems to carry weight with Obama, don't you think? But Richardson has the added draw of being a Western governor, a former foreign policy advisor under Bill Clinton, an authentic voice in the Hispanic community, and an affable guy. Having Richardson on the ticket would help Obama overcome the current CW that he's arrogant or distant. Richardson is the kind of guy you want to have over to watch the superbowl -- oh, that's right, BC did that, didn't he?

It might put a knot in James Carville's knickers... but since when is that a bar to public office?

Richardson for VEEP!
------------------------
"Its all in your Mind" today on
http://ilfamilypolitics.blogspot.com

Posted by: Julia Kelly | July 11, 2008 10:34 AM | Report abuse

Biden Biden Biden

Posted by: dburck | July 11, 2008 10:31 AM | Report abuse

Evan Bayh is John Edwards lite. He is a pretty face who is loved in his home state. Beyond that, regardless of experience, I don't think he'll be of much assistance. With that said, a Bayh/Romney debate would be hilarious! What a hair and makeup budget that would have!

That is *not* the way to woo women voters, folks.

As others have pointed out, you have failed to mention Bill Richardson. He did, after all, just get a haircut.

Richardson and Kaine help with the electoral map. Kaine's Harvard connection is vital -- it seems to carry weight with Obama, don't you think? But Richardson has the double draw of being a Western governor, a former foreign policy advisor under Bill Clinton, an authentic voice in the Hispanic community, and an affable guy. Having Richardson on the ticket would help Obama overcome the current CW that he's arrogant or distant. Richardson is the kind of guy you want to have over to watch the superbowl -- oh, that's right, BC did that, didn't he?

It might put a knot in James Carville's knickers... but since when is that a bar to public office?

Richardson for VEEP!
------------------------
"Its all in your Mind" today on
http://ilfamilypolitics.blogspot.com

Posted by: Julia Kelly | July 11, 2008 10:31 AM | Report abuse

I, too, am surprised at the omission of Governor Richardson from the list. I really think he is one of the few VP picks that could actually put states in play these days. Being hispanic, he makes New Mexico, Colorado, Nevada and Florida competitive (or, rather, moreso for the Democrats). He has congressional, executive, cabinet and international experience and, in fact, has successfully negotiated with dictators such as Saddam Hussein for the release of US personnel. Obama could legitimately claim that Richardson is a national hero. Richardson shores up Obama's weaknesses while pulling in a whole demographic that Obama is having problems with.

Posted by: Ron | July 11, 2008 10:29 AM | Report abuse

I'd love to see Fiorina on the Republican ticket. It would take about a minute to point out her clash with McCain on "women's issues" and to discredit her falsehoods on taxes.

Fiorina routinely claims Obama would raise taxes on "23 million small businesses," but that claim's been shown repeatedly to be smoke and mirrors - minus the smoke. And the mirrors.

Posted by: FlowOver | July 11, 2008 10:28 AM | Report abuse

Obama needs a woman -- what about Caroline Kennedy?

Posted by: mm | July 11, 2008 10:27 AM | Report abuse

In addition to Tim Kaine, I believe Rep Sen Chuck Hagel and Dem Sen Bill Nelson of Fl should be on Obama's list.

For McCain, I believe Charlie Crist and Tom Ridge are the leading contenders.

Posted by: Ash | July 11, 2008 10:24 AM | Report abuse

Your GOP list is almost spot on, however Pawlenty shouldn't be on, let alone #2. There's no way McSame takes Minnesota, so it's a pointless consideration. Take him out, put in Crist just ahead of Jindal, and you have the GOP side.

Your Dem list is awful. The top 3 are HORRIBLE picks. Kaine brings NO experience on the foreign stage, is at best the 3rd most popular Dem in his state, and is a boring, boring campaigner. The only Virginian who would have been worth it was Warner.

Then there's Evan Bayh. Boy, he was helpful for Hillary in Indiana- really delivered in her underwhelming win. Her 7 point lead in the polls ends in a 2 point win that kills her candidacy. Great job Evan. Put this with his frosty relationship with his Dad, the way he puts the base to sleep, and his penchant for folding when things are tough (his 2 day campaign this time as an example), and you have a winner.

Then there is Sebelius.....zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz....... BORING! She wouldn't bring in ONE state to Obama. She wouldn't address one concern for him either- namely his issues with experience. Horrible, horrible, horrible pick.

So who is good? If he really doesn't want to pick Hillary, but wants her network, go with Rendell. That guy delivers his state for sure, probably Ohio too, and brings economic chops that can be quantified with his term as Philadelphia Mayor, saving the city.

Obama should really be looking at Biden, Dodd, Clinton, Rendell, Corzine, Edwards, Max Cleland, Schweitzer, Bob Graham, or a general. Those are some winners. All of these "trendy" folks like Kaine, Sebelius, and Bayh are terrible.

Posted by: Goracle | July 11, 2008 10:23 AM | Report abuse

Should come down to Gore, Sebelius or Schweitzer. You got one of these three. The others will show up. Time lag.

Posted by: Stephen C. Rose | July 11, 2008 10:22 AM | Report abuse

If Gore would have picked Graham in 00 he would have been President. Anyone want to argue that Graham is not worth at least 600 votes! C'mon.......

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2008 10:21 AM | Report abuse

Chris

Not to deject your list but Obama is smarter than picking a candidate on one state.

there are some big influences, but 4 or 5 are at the top, in picking a VP and your list doesn't reflect those as accurately as it should I think.

The VP should be a great second attack dog.
The VP should be the best choice for the VP debate.
The VP should reasonably benefit in the state count.
The VP should bring something of balance to the table.
and most importantly the VP should reinforce a quiet confidence and be able to carry the country through a tragedy if we were to lose a President and then lead after that tragedy.

Those are, I think you will agree, 5 of the most important factors.

So without a doubt...whether you think he's loud mouthed or "king of the foot in mouth disease" Biden is the VP pick. and I am not some Biden plant...it's just hard to see how you came up with your math in the face of what has now been staring me in the face since early this year.
1. He has been the leading attack dog "or the face of" at minimum (on all the news programs) for the last 6 years. and continues to be even with Obama running. So he may have been around a long timebut he has always been talking about the changed policies that Obama always refers.
2. There is no one McCain could put up that would beat Biden in a one on one debate. Period. and no other candidate (including Hillary) would handle a debate better. He is considered by an extraordinary many the smartest guy on foreign policy in office.
3 a PA boy whose state is neighbors to Virginia and whom speaks very well to blue collar whites...
4 Experience overwhelmingly without really (as much as people want to argue experience is in opposition to change) offending the change Obama is speaking of...He has been the loudest voice for changing this administration's policies that America has been hearing on their televisions for the past 8 years.
5 Can you think of another candidate he is looking at that would make this country feel secure if heaven forbid we lost a President. Unfortunately for Hillary...the only other one who could have had that quality...the plane incident this past week and the subsequent rumors (stupid or not)about it being her plane and the subsequent rumors and innuendo that followed...would prove hobbling to any President. I mean you have to admit...almost anyone who heard it was Hillary's plane had a faint whisper of human "hmmm" when they heard that.

Unfortunately, right or wrong that would hobble her effectiveness.

Just a couple thoughts...

hope your not offended but I think there is no question anyone outside of Biden would be "going against the numbers"...so to speak.

Posted by: DL Willson | July 11, 2008 10:20 AM | Report abuse

I think someone said if Bayh was VP Gore would be President.... what! Bayh would do as well as Edwards did in his homestate - which means the Dems wouldn't even win it. Nor would he bring any other Midwestern States into the mix.
AND if the #1 most important priority is to pick someone who is prepared to take the oath of office if God forbid they need to -- how can Kathleen Sebelius be mentioned. She is not ready to be President.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2008 10:19 AM | Report abuse

What about Bill Richardson? I like him for 4 reasons: 1. He's Hispanic and will bring in that vote all over the country; 2. He's from the SW and so will eat into McCain's strength there; 3. He's a governor, not a Congressman, giving a bit of "outside the DC beltway"; 4. and although he's an "outsider", he has tons of international experience. He's a bit hokey at times, but I think that can be controlled as a VP.

Posted by: ginsing | July 11, 2008 10:18 AM | Report abuse

Good picks except the black horse here needs to be retired Senator and Governor of Florida Bob Graham!
His foreign policy credentials are arguably as impressive as someone like JOe Biden as he was the Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee and like Sam Nunn continues to work in the field - now as Chairman for Congressionally Mandated Committee on Weapons of Mass Destruction and Proliferation and beats everyone else on this list in that measure. Electorally - he trumps everyone else on the list as with Graham on the ticket you have a REAL chance of winning the VP's home state and though you could possibly make the case with Tim Kaine Florida over Virginia is a no brainer - and picking Graham doesn't leave you in the lurch of filling a seat. He is also arguably better prepared for the job then anyone mentioned above as Senator Graham has executive experience as he was and still remains one of the most popular (two term) Governor's in the State's history
In addition Graham - unlike the other Senator's on the list voted NO on the Iraq war resolution and as a Senator wasn't afforded the luxury of NOT voting (i.e. Sebelius) and then making the case on how the would have voted years later. Graham had to stand on the Senate floor and declare why he thought it was a mistake then which Graham was widely criticized for doing at the time.
Furthermore, on other issues of importance his voting and performance record as Senator and Governor on the Enviornment, education, etc.... makes him a solid pick for the Democratic party.
Finally, though Graham has suffered from some of the same knocks over the years (lack of charisma, not exciting enough) I do agree those are so insignificant in this election.
I can't think of a more experienced (30+ years of public service) do no harm, trusted advisor with no personal agenda, advantageous pick for Senator Obama. Someone who he could always count on and who without a doubt could be President in his own right.

Posted by: FLDEM08 | July 11, 2008 10:15 AM | Report abuse

I can't imagine Kaine is the #1. I think its a race between Sebellius and Bayh, with a dark horse like Claire McCaskill thrown in.

As for McCain, Romney is just making too much sense. Although I think if McCain is 10 points down in August, he may just wing it and go for Joe Leiberman.

Posted by: Mike | July 11, 2008 10:13 AM | Report abuse

Tim Kaine is only popular with the liberals in northern Virginia (like the Fix). The rest of the state can't stand his relentless tax, tax, tax policies.

Posted by: Jay S | July 11, 2008 10:11 AM | Report abuse

Currently Sebelius is the 4/1 favourite to get it.

Posted by: Ed | July 11, 2008 9:53 AM | Report abuse

Kaine is losing credibility in VA since he hasn't been able to solve the transportation problem. He (and Obama) need to show that they can actually lead instead of just blaming the republicans for everything as Kaine has done in this situation.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2008 9:49 AM | Report abuse

It's Evan Bayh. If Gore would have picked him instead of Sen. Doom and Gloom, he would have been president.

Posted by: MNDem | July 11, 2008 9:48 AM | Report abuse

Virginia's lieutenant governor is a Republican, so a Vice President Kaine would mean that the Democrats surrender the governorship.

Posted by: David Fahey | July 11, 2008 9:33 AM

True, however, the governorship will be up for grabs in 2009 anyways and Kaine can't run again. The "harm" as Democrats see it would be minimal. And for Kaine, where could he go after being governor? Both Senate seats will be held by Democrats, so if he was asked to be VP I can't see him saying no.

Posted by: JNoel002 | July 11, 2008 9:48 AM | Report abuse

And there is a weekly 2008 Vice President poll at http://www.votenic.com that includes all of these candidates. See what America thinks!

Posted by: Brandon | July 11, 2008 9:47 AM | Report abuse

sorry for the multiple posts, I was getting an error message.

Posted by: RealChoices | July 11, 2008 9:36 AM | Report abuse

The Clintons are trying to blackmail Obama on multiple fronts to force him into making her co-President. While she is sucking up to him in public, Bill is being aloof and they have told their donors to hold back. They want to dictate Obama's terms of surrender to him: Hillary will ostensibly be Vice-President but with powers equal to those of Obama and Bill will have his own portfolio. The Clintons play second fiddle to no one, they are dishonest and self-serving.

For the things that really matter, there is no reason whatsoever to put Hillary on the ticket. There are two important considerations when it comes to choosing a Vice-Presidential nominee. One, does it help the ticket win, and two, does the choice fit in the future Administration. As to the first, I've seen no polling data that shows a Obama-Hillary ticket running stronger than Obama is running now. As the second, the evidence is clear and unambiguous, Hillary and Bill would be a disaster for an Obama Administration, we can't have three chief executives.

I assume Obama realizes this and I also understand he needs to make nice to them in public but he would be fool to have her as his "Vice-Presidential" nominee.

Posted by: RealChoices | July 11, 2008 9:34 AM | Report abuse

Virginia's lieutenant governor is a Republican, so a Vice President Kaine would mean that the Democrats surrender the governorship.

Posted by: David Fahey | July 11, 2008 9:33 AM | Report abuse

The Clintons are trying to blackmail Obama on multiple fronts to force him into making her co-President. While she is sucking up to him in public, Bill is being aloof and they have told their donors to hold back. They want to dictate Obama's terms of surrender to him: Hillary will ostensibly be Vice-President but with powers equal to those of Obama and Bill will have his own portfolio. The Clintons play second fiddle to no one, they are dishonest and self-serving.

For the things that really matter, there is no reason whatsoever to put Hillary on the ticket. There are two important considerations when it comes to choosing a Vice-Presidential nominee. One, does it help the ticket win, and two, does the choice fit in the future Administration. As to the first, I've seen no polling data that shows a Obama-Hillary ticket running stronger than Obama is running now. As the second, the evidence is clear and unambiguous, Hillary and Bill would be a disaster for an Obama Administration, we can't have three chief executives.

I assume Obama realizes this and I also understand he needs to make nice to them in public but he would be fool to have her as his "Vice-Presidential" nominee.

Posted by: RealChoices | July 11, 2008 9:33 AM | Report abuse

How can the Obama people consider Hillary Clinton when Patty Solis Doyle, who was fored by her, has been hired by Obama to be the chosen vp's go-too person? Kind of an awkward pairing there!

Posted by: Patricia Barry | July 11, 2008 9:32 AM | Report abuse

The Clintons are trying to blackmail Obama on multiple fronts to force him into making her co-President. While she is sucking up to him in public, Bill is being aloof and they have told their donors to hold back. They want to dictate Obama's terms of surrender to him: Hillary will ostensibly be Vice-President but with powers equal to those of Obama and Bill will have his own portfolio. The Clintons play second fiddle to no one, they are dishonest and self-serving.

For the things that really matter, there is no reason whatsoever to put Hillary on the ticket. There are two important considerations when it comes to choosing a Vice-Presidential nominee. One, does it help the ticket win, and two, does the choice fit in the future Administration. As to the first, I've seen no polling data that shows a Obama-Hillary ticket running stronger than Obama is running now. As the second, the evidence is clear and unambiguous, Hillary and Bill would be a disaster for an Obama Administration, we can't have three chief executives.

I assume Obama realizes this and I also understand he needs to make nice to them in public but he would be fool to have her as his "Vice-Presidential" nominee.

Posted by: RealChoices | July 11, 2008 9:31 AM | Report abuse

Nice to see the Fix has drunk the McCain Kool-Aid like the rest of the national press corps:

"The argument against Ridge is that he favors abortion rights and would anger the Republican base if picked. But since when has McCain worried about that?"

Aside from flip-flopping on tax cuts, torture, judges, immigration, campaign finance, abortion, gay rights, social security, etc. etc. etc. he doesn't care about the base.

Posted by: Noah | July 11, 2008 9:31 AM | Report abuse

You missed Chris Dodd, Cillizza.

He's smart, experienced on issues both foreign and domestic, speaks Spanish, distinguished-looking but/and won't overshadow Obama. A solid choice. He's like the white Bill Richardson, or the not-crazy Joe Biden.

Posted by: north_aufzoo | July 11, 2008 9:31 AM | Report abuse

"Since when has McCain worried about [angering the Republican base?"

Really, Chris? I'd say since about the time he had his lips surgically affixed to Jerry Falwell's backside. He's done nothing but pander to the base this time out. You might be right if this were the 2000-model McCain, but nobody's seen THAT guy around for ages.

Posted by: FlownOver | July 11, 2008 9:30 AM | Report abuse

Tony Tune:
Joe Lieberman? My best buddy? No way. In fact, if elected, Obama's first official act will be to load Joe onto a rocket and fire it into the Sun.

Posted by: NeoCon | July 11, 2008 9:20 AM | Report abuse

Say what you will about Joe Biden (and believe us, we have heard it all), it's hard to argue that the guy knows his stuff -- particularly when it comes to foreign policy.

I believe the phrase should read "...it's hard to argue that the guy DOESN'T know his stuff..."

As printed it is saying Biden's knowledge is debatable.

Posted by: Picky Linguist | July 11, 2008 9:08 AM | Report abuse

I agree with a lot of comments that Richardson should definetly be on this list.
I personally like either Sebelius, Kaine, or Biden.

If it came down to it I'd go with Sebelius. That's the money train.

Posted by: rick020 | July 11, 2008 9:07 AM | Report abuse

Arghh! was beaten to point out that GHWB was selected in '80 not '88. OK... hmmm, hey NPR mentioned Al Gore, any thoughts on that?

Posted by: MexWPFan | July 11, 2008 8:52 AM | Report abuse

Agree with Amod Damle in his comments. Bill Richardson has to be a much more serious contender than either Clinton or Sebelius.

Richardson gives New Mexico a firm nudge into the blue column, in addition will shore up positions with hispanics along the border states of California, Arizona (no chance of a win there), Texas, NM as well as Florida, Colorado and Nevada. His foreign policy experience will help beat McCain's FP argument, which is tenuous at best.

The one area that Richardson won't particularly boost is military experience.

If they want an out of the box, bold pick, for me it has to be Colin Powell for Obama veep. Wipes out McCain's advantage in military and FP 'experience', throws the military vote up in the air. Best spoiler to the McCain guns and ammo gameplan.

Posted by: Mike | July 11, 2008 8:50 AM | Report abuse

>>>Making hard and fast predictions about politics is a fool's errand.

But apparently it makes a decent living. Go figure.

Anyway, on these "lists."

I agree with previous commentators that:
-- Omission of Bill Richardson was a firing offense. Clearly he is in play and fits all of Chris' lines of argument.
-- Sebelius is also under-valued in the rankings.
-- Romney is way, way, way overrated here. Romney will be, via YouTube re-runs, the Democrat's best spokesman AGAINST McCain.

I'll add this:
-- Jindal's late addition to the list shows that The Fix is several weeks behind the news. Jindal was hot around Memorial Day, but has clearly cooled off. His comments have moved closer to "no, I don't want it."
His youth would highlight McCain's age. His 18 months in office would blunt criticism of Obama's shorter resume.
And, most importantly, Jindal has raised the ire of conservatives by signing a pay increase for Louisiana's Democratic controlled legislature -- after he said he never, ever would do such a thing.
If anything, Jindal came OFF the VP lists last week.
C'mon Fix, give us some NEWS.

Posted by: Ego Nemo | July 11, 2008 8:49 AM | Report abuse

How about Florida Rep. Wexler or Sen. Leberman for Dem.?

Posted by: Tony Tune | July 11, 2008 8:47 AM | Report abuse

I agree - some very odd choices.

Ridge will not get it beacuse McCain will stear well away from anybody touched by Bush (this alos sinks Rob Portman's chances). As for Kaine, in this Va.ers view, he's pretty much a zero - won on the coatails of Mark Warner and has done nothing in office since.

And to not include Richardson (in my view Obama's best option) as well as Charlie Crist (locks up Fl. for McCain) or Carly Fiorina is missing some obvious ones.

I'd ranking like this

McCain
1)Rommney
2)Crist
3)Jindal
4)Fiorina
5)Pawlenty

Obama
1)Richardson
2)Bayh
3)Biden
4)Clinton
5)Edwards

Posted by: fjh3q | July 11, 2008 8:44 AM | Report abuse

I guess what is throwing everyone of the trail about Obamas VP choice is that everyone seems to be focusing on finding someone with foreign experience. That is why Webb was the odds on favourite until he pulled his name from the hat.

That is what the defence secretary is for.

Its the economy that will drive the VP. And Sebelius wins hands down there.

Posted by: Ed | July 11, 2008 8:42 AM | Report abuse

What about Sarah Palin Governor of Alaska for McCains VP? She's young (ony 43), conservative, extremenly popular and best of all to counter Obama she's female. It at least would be something different to break up the monotony of the white guys listed above.

Posted by: RobT | July 11, 2008 8:39 AM | Report abuse

What about John Kerry as Obama's VP? Excellent foreign policy experience, statesmanlike, military background, a good speaker and debater. It doesn't help that he's from MA, and he wouln't represent change, but he's definitely "ready from day one".

Posted by: Nigel K. | July 11, 2008 8:27 AM | Report abuse

Want the only brilliant choice for McCain? Bloomberg is the answer. He could likely deliver NY, NJ, Fl...maybe even CA. He fills in the hole created by McCain's weakness on the economy. True, like Ridge, he will be somewhat anathema to the far right; but who will they turn to? Obama? Bloomberg also is from the same maverick stamp as the man at the top of the ticket with a resume a mile long. Sure, you hear his name as a possible Obama running mate. But does anyone think a Jew will be successfully ticketed with an African American? Best of all, Bloomberg does not wear religion on his sleeve like Lieberman did four years ago.

Posted by: jay | July 11, 2008 8:14 AM | Report abuse

Don't forget Janet Napolitano: maybe Obama would pick her even if her last name isn't Clinton, because he would be able to say "I want to fight against McCain up to his adoptive home".

And what about Schweitzer ? An outsider, of course, but trying to win Montana and North Dakota, maybe even Alaska would be a good idea: McCain would be forced to spend in normally red states.

Hillary can be scrapped from your list.

I agree with Kaine on top.

As for GOP, Ridge is too old and wouldn't deliver PA.

Why Mark Sanford isn't more discussed about ? Has he made a Sherman statement ?

I would bet on a McCain-Pawlenty.

3 years ago, I dreamt (as a French) of a McCain-Romney ticket. That would have been wonderful IF both of them hadn't competed against each other, with a Romney diminished by all the various things he said.

Romney has money, Michigan roots, business experience, an ability to regain momentum in Western states (Montant, ND, Nevada, even Colorado).

But it's difficult to influence McCain, so he will stick to a T-Paw pick.

Posted by: Horos | July 11, 2008 8:13 AM | Report abuse

It amuses me sometimes how political journalists can get it so wrong even though they follow the news far more closely than us mere mortals.

I can tell you who will be Obamas vice president. You mentioned how Kaine endorsed Obama 'way back' in February.

Well the next vice president of America endorsed Obama way back in January.

Sebelius.

( i knew this back in January and i have the betting slip to prove it )

Posted by: Ed | July 11, 2008 8:12 AM | Report abuse

The Line: Where the only constant is Cilizza not knowing what he's talking about.

Posted by: JDP | July 11, 2008 8:03 AM | Report abuse

What about Carly Fiorina on the McCain side?

Posted by: june1ron | July 11, 2008 7:43 AM | Report abuse

Bush 1 was chosen as VP in 80, not 88.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2008 7:41 AM | Report abuse

What? No Edwards? He's still the least harmful choice for Obama. And it helps that he is a southern white man.

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Posted by: matt | July 11, 2008 7:32 AM | Report abuse

I dont see how Gov. Richardson isnt a candidate in consideration...he is a governor of a state Obama should play well in, former UN Ambassador giving him foreign policy experience and ofcourse being hispanic helps him tap into a community he badly needs to beat McCain...I would imagine the Gov would place higher than Sen. Bayh and Sen. Biden,

Posted by: Amod Damle | July 11, 2008 7:28 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company