Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Friday Veepstakes Line: Crunch Time!

The Last Veeps Standing

Last Veeps Standing (L to R) Dems: Reed, Sebelius, Kaine, Bayh, Biden
GOP: Jindal, Lieberman, Romney, Ridge, Pawlenty

The vice presidential sweepstakes has become such a hot topic that last night at The Fix gym one guy called out "Who's it going to be?" and we knew exactly what he was talking about.

An announcement by Barack Obama is expected any day now -- he returns from vacation in Hawaii today -- with John McCain still expected to wait until after the Illinois senator makes his pick before naming his number two.

Friday Line

In conversations with a wide variety of sources on both sides of the aisle, we have some sense of the mindset of each man as he approaches one of the most momentous decisions in this campaign.

For Obama, the general sense is that he will opt for a "safe" choice -- a known commodity along the lines of either Sen. Joe Biden (Del.) or Sen. Evan Bayh (Ind.).

A look at the decisions Obama has made since becoming the nominee -- opting out of public financing, reversing course on the domestic surveillance bill, etc. -- suggests a real strain of pragmatism in his thinking that further bolsters the "steady hand" argument when it comes to his vice presidential selection.

For McCain, it's clear that -- all things being equal -- he would like to pick someone with whom he has a personal rapport -- hence the re-emergence of McCain friends like former Pennsylvania governor Tom Ridge and Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) and the decline in buzz around former governor Mitt Romney (Mass.).

McCain's decision to float the idea of a pro-choice running mate in a sitdown with Weekly Standard's Steve Hayes was no accident either, and is rightly read as a trial balloon for the possibility of eithert Ridge or Lieberman as the nominee.

A caveat: Take anything you read here or elsewhere about the veepstakes with a grain of salt; those who know the most about the process tend to be those who talk the least.

As always, the number one ranked candidate is the most likely to be picked. Your thoughts on our picks are welcome in the comments section below.

To the Line!

REPUBLICANS

5. Bobby Jindal: The chatter surrounding the Louisiana governor has died down significantly of late but we still believe that if McCain decides on making a true surprise pick, Jindal's the guy. (Previous ranking: 5)

4. Mitt Romney: On the one hand, Romney seems to make the most sense for McCain -- shoring up the ticket's economic bona fides and helping the nominee in Michigan and New Hampshire. On the other, McCain is a total "gut" politician and, if he trusts his instincts, he's not likely to pick someone with whom he is not close personally. (Previous ranking: 1)

3. Joe Lieberman: Believe it -- the Connecticut Democrat-cum-Independent is very much in the mix for McCain. Why? Lieberman has long been supportive of McCain's position on the war in Iraq and the two men like each other immensely. Plus, picking Lieberman could be spun by pro-McCain forces as yet another example of his commitment to bipartisanship. (Previous ranking: N/A)

2. Tom Ridge: The former Pennsylvania governor is the hottest name in the Republican veepstakes -- due in large part to McCain's repeated praise of him and the growing sense that the Arizona Senator is seriously considering a pro-choice pick. Ridge would almost certainly put Pennsylvania more squarely in play and would also allow McCain to double down on the national security message in the general election. (Previous ranking: N/A)

1. Tim Pawlenty: Tpaw returns to the top of the (final?) Line thanks to the fact that out of all true "Final Four" lists he checks the most boxes. He is pro-life, has been elected twice as governor in a swing Midwestern state and has a personal friendship with McCain. Is it enough? (Previous ranking: 2)

DEMOCRATS

5. Kathleen Sebelius: There's no question that of the names on this list, Obama feels closest to Sebelius and Tim Kaine. But, is a close personal relationship enough? Sebelius' star has faltered somewhat as some within Democratic circles have come to believe the Kansas governor is not ready for such a big stage. And, can Obama really choose a woman not named Clinton as his vice president? (Previous ranking: 5)

4. Jack Reed: Perhaps the least buzzed about serious vice presidential candidate in history, the Rhode Island senator remains a real option. And, if security is the central theme of the convention, Reed could be a perfect fit: his resume includes a stint in the U.S. Army and service on the Senate Armed Services Committee. (Previous ranking: 4)

3. Tim Kaine: In naming former Virginia governor Mark Warner as the convention keynote speaker earlier this week, the Obama campaign either a) closed the door on Kaine as veep or b) opened the door for a Virginia-centric convention designed to highlight the importance of that swing state. We tend to believe option "a" though the Virginia governor's early support for Obama should not be underplayed as a factor in the final decision. (Previous ranking: 2)

2. Evan Bayh: To the extent there was buzz around Bayh -- those words don't usually end up in the same sentence together -- it has died down over the last week. Some within the party -- especially those on the liberal left -- believe picking Bayh would be a sell-out of the principles that won Obama the nomination. The Indiana senator and former governor remains very much in the running, however, thanks to his Midwestern roots, his executive experience and his youth. (Previous ranking: 1)

1. Joe Biden: Biden is peaking at the right time. Barely mentioned at the start of the veepstakes, he is now the favorite to be the pick. Biden's deep foreign policy resume, charisma, blue-collar appeal and debate skills all recommend him. And, the normally loquacious Biden has been stone silent over the last few weeks -- stoking speculation that he is the one. (Previous ranking: 3)

By Chris Cillizza  |  August 15, 2008; 1:25 PM ET
Categories:  The Line , Veepstakes  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Friday Senate Line: Is 62 Democrats' Magic Number?
Next: Who Won the Week?

Comments

Biden is a solid choice for Obama. He is already known to voters from the primaries season, he would shore up Obama's foreign policy cred, he's charismatic and well-spoken, and he has good teeth.

Posted by: jwrightable | August 19, 2008 1:16 PM | Report abuse

If we really want the U.S. to be loved by the entire world, then Senator Obama (the most popular guy in France) should pick as his V.P. the most popular guy in China (Kobe Bryant). The press will eat it up!

Posted by: Mike Smith | August 18, 2008 8:25 PM | Report abuse

None of the above. The best VP choice for McCain is Meg Whitman. She is an economic whiz and will take the rough edges off of McCain.

Posted by: Karol | August 18, 2008 4:17 PM | Report abuse

Amber, how can any woman who is a supporter of HRC and truly loves this country hope that McCain becomes president over Obama? You make absolutely NO sense at all. Your candidate lost the primary. its time to get over it and move forward. Its not all about YOU.

I still think that if McInsane choses Lieberman, the Evangelical Christians will go NUTS. If they have a problem with Obama's religious beliefs and his faith, think about what they will say about an Orthodox Jew!

A great choice for McInsane would be Ridge, but again, the Evangelicals would NOT be happy with ANYONE who was pro-choice, regardless of his positions on anything else or how much such a person could add to the ticket.

PG

Posted by: PeixeGato | August 18, 2008 2:29 PM | Report abuse

The theme for an Obama Biden ticket...

in the infamous words of Stephen king in Stand By Me

"Chopper... ...sick balls!"

and watch Mccain's camp hugging there crotches...lol.

Posted by: dl | August 18, 2008 1:25 PM | Report abuse

Go Joe Biden!

Posted by: dognabbit | August 18, 2008 1:12 PM | Report abuse

Gee....Ahole....lets not include Hillary Clinton (the one who SHOULD be Veep).

You journalists are pathetic. America has gone to pieces and the media is choosing our elected officials now.

I hope if he doesn't have the grace and intelligence to put Clinton the ticket, that he loses bigtime to McCain. And he probably will, especially if McCain chooses Romney!

Posted by: Amber | August 18, 2008 10:30 AM | Report abuse

In forecasting vp picks, the foremost idea is to chose someone whom the nominees would more likely want as a running mate.
Like JFK, Senator Barack Obama is young and hasn't served that long in the U.S. Senate. So I think he will be cautious and select someone older and more experienced in foreign affairs, someone more blue-color. Senator Joe Biden would be the ablest prospect, and certainly more qualified to be president than all others except Chris Dodd.
If Senator Obama picks Biden, it would then follow that Senator John McCain would pick someone with excellent credentials, but younger and experienced as a governor. I don't see Mitt Romney being someone McCain could work that well with, so Tom Ridge from Pennsylvania would be the running mate who could match up the best against Biden.
As much as I like Bill Richardson, I don't think he fits Obama as well, and he might well serve better in the Cabinet. And I think more Democrats would rather see Hillary Clinton in the Cabinet (where she can burnish her credentials for president) than hazard a bad fit.

Posted by: Jonathan R. Seaver | August 18, 2008 9:33 AM | Report abuse

I think McCain will either pick Pawlenty or Lieberman. If McCain thinks he can serve 2 terms and leave a new Republican leader, Pawlenty is the man. But, if McCain thinks he is only up to serve one term then let these primaries play out again in 2012, Lieberman is the man. With a McCain/Lieberman Presidency, they both have good relationships with congressional colleagues on both sides to actually tackle really tough, yet major, issues of the day: social security, medicare, medicaid, energy independence, immigration & the decline of the dollar. I realize these issues don't make for great sound bites, but they are truly the central issues here in America. If McCain/Lieberman worked really hard 4 years just on those issues, that's about what it would take. Plus, people would be so mad at them in the short term if they were actually to solve these issues, b/c real solutions to these things are not "politically popular" to interest groups.

Obama could choose Bayh or Biden to put some experience on the ticket. It would also put military expertise on the ticket. Or, he could emphasize the "change" candidacy with Va. gov. Tim Kaine. Kaine is a white Washington outsider from a middle class family, is a pro life Catholic & is from a crucial swing state of Virginia. My guess is that Obama sticks with change and picks Tim Kaine.

McCain/Pawlenty vs. Obama/Kaine.

Posted by: reason | August 18, 2008 8:51 AM | Report abuse

It will be Obama/Clark and McCain/Romney.

Strange to have Reed on the line and not Clark. Reed is from the smallest state in the Union and RI is for Obama anyway.

Posted by: J. Henriksen | August 18, 2008 7:31 AM | Report abuse

McCain-Whitman
Obama-Biden

My guess would be that McCain is going to try to lock this up by picking off some of the woman vote. Whitman carries the gender and economic cards, both of which are invaluable this cycle. She is also a Washington outsider.

Obama needs foreign policy and experience creds, as well as a working class soldier. Biden is the ticket, but he will be monitored very carefully so that his verbal gaffes are held to a minimum.

Posted by: Kevin Casey McAvey | August 18, 2008 12:31 AM | Report abuse


I think this will all come down to Ohio.
McCain will pick Portman or Kasich.
I think Obama will pick Gephardt or
Strickland.

Posted by: Florida Voter | August 17, 2008 11:47 PM | Report abuse

dude how do you leave off eric cantor? id put him ahead of jindal as a "lets shake things up" pick for mccain.

Posted by: gabe | August 17, 2008 10:44 PM | Report abuse

Hey left-leaning-soon-to-be-losers (you know who you are)
Here's the situation straight from CNN- The race is tied; the bounce has evaporated; and John took the night last night. Futhermore we're all suffering from Obama fatigue- that rockstar act with the swooning etc is looking like Spinal Tap II. Theres nothing like peaking too soon

Posted by: Scott | August 17, 2008 5:06 PM | Report abuse

McCain's poll numbers have been buoyed in recent weeks by the prospect of a Romney vice-presidency. If that doesn't happen I expect Obama will start to pull away.

Posted by: momotaro | August 17, 2008 9:15 AM | Report abuse

I'm glad so many people are "resting their case." All of those reasonable, calm certain pronouncements that so-and-so is definitely the pick sound intelligent and believable right up until the point when they're wrong. And the actual choices of the candidates sound smart or dumb right up until the point they aren't. It takes decades before we reach any kind of consensus as to whether these picks are good or not, or even whether they had any serious effect on the outcome of the election. My biggest hope is that both candidates make a surprising choice for running mate, and every person who posted a comment on here that they were sure who would get picked (and were therefore wrong) posts an appropriate response.

Posted by: Budikavlan | August 17, 2008 9:01 AM | Report abuse

You are all so entertaining.The knowledge you have is priceless...meaning it's not worth much.Thanks,Chris,for prefacing this blog with the need to "take it with a grain of salt".
If it's not Biden or Reed,in alphabetical and logical order,then Obama has made a mistake.I rest my case.Now,can we go on to something else? Vaya con Dios.

Posted by: HoosierDaddy | August 17, 2008 1:11 AM | Report abuse

As you notice Obama listed Lugar and Nunn but not Biden tonight.

Biden is his VP.

Posted by: dl | August 16, 2008 11:56 PM | Report abuse

Amazing stuff.

My old man was right about Americans: "son unos asquerosos". It's hard to translate exactly. It means "they're nauseating" in direct translation but the sense of it is different. Like uncurious, uneducated, brutish, and unpleasant. He hated them worse than the Germans, I swear.

We'd be at a hotel somewhere in the pool when I was a kid and if he heard Americans in the pool, he'd get to thinking they'd made the water dirty or something and run back to his lounge chair. I'm not THAT extreme! I have a lot of American friends LOL!

Obama/Biden v McCain/Pawlenty. That's a choice? You could put those four names into a hat and redraw them and have the same philosophy: lots of Jesus and War, very little attention to sound economic policy, plus barbaric social policy.

From March to June Obama seemed to offer something different. I thought, well, maybe Americans have finally gotten it right. Now, I really cannot see the difference in VIEWS. I see the difference in intelligence and finesse, but Obama hasn't said anything since June that I've agreed with. Most of it has matched up pretty closely with McCain. Biden is about as NAUSEATING an American as you can find. That I have no problem writing. And it sure does commit Obama to policies that are right of Noriega's and left of Pinochet's. That's not an exaggeration at all. Noriega was a jerk and a pain in the butt but he knew how to do business and you never heard and religious mumbo-jumbo from him.

Dictator or not his criminal justice system was downright HIPPIE-ISH compared to the system Obama supports. Manuel Noriega was not incarcerating juveniles with adults or executing juveniles. Or throwing 16 year old boys into prison for fooling around with 15-year old girls.

Obama's fine with all of that. No problem whatsoever with Gitmo or warrantless wiretapping. Wow. Manuel Noriega would have been in the moderate wing of the Democratic Party. That's pretty funny!

Now that I think about it, I don't know how big a hurry I'd be in to be swimming in the same pool as a bunch of American tourists. Yuck.

If I knew at the outset of the campaign what I know now, I'd have voted for Ron Paul if I were an American and I would have known I had the best candidate.

Posted by: DexterManley | August 16, 2008 11:01 PM | Report abuse

McCain should pick buddy and good-guy Tim Pawlenty.

Save formal rising starts like Jindal, Palin and newly reformed neocon Romney for 2012 and beyond.

On the Dem side, it won't be Biden.

The only reason - and I mean ONLY reason - is fear (and not of what Biden might say off-the-cuff).

Why Obama and his folks won't pick Biden is the same reason he did not accompany BO to Iraq: a gigantic shadow of qualification and experience.

If this year's race was TRULY about who is most qualified to run the U.S. and clean up the Cheney quagmire, Biden would have run away with the Dem nomination.

That said, Obama's advisors know this too well. They want to fill his inexperience void, not highlight it with a bar as high as Biden's literally unmatched resume.

In this, it's a case of Biden is actually TOO GOOD and TOO QUALIFIED to be the pick.

It's the truth, the sad truth - but truth nonetheless.

Biden would be a GREAT pres, VP, Sec of State, etc. Perhaps the latter in time.

That leaves Richardson, Bayh and Jack Reed with Clark and Dodd as darkhorses.

If only conventional wisdom - and the politics of a general campaign - was actually based on wisdom.

Posted by: Rick Bruni Jr. | August 16, 2008 10:56 PM | Report abuse

How about Brian Schweitzer? With all the focus on energy policy, he would be an ideal choice.

Posted by: Jen D | August 16, 2008 10:21 PM | Report abuse

All of you Palin people do realize she is in hot water for tyring to get a police chief to fire one of his officer's because he dumped her sister. An investigation McCain would not want, especially when tied to other Alaska Repugs. Sorry, the "libs" and MSM (so scary) would eat her for breakfast.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 16, 2008 9:03 PM | Report abuse

By the way I just received my first TWO invitations to a "Joebama" Party. lol

I guess they are a little presumptious...but if he picks Biden.

Posted by: dl | August 16, 2008 6:57 PM | Report abuse

I am coming around the the realization that the best pick Obama has is Jim Webb. Both McCain and Webb have extensive military background but Webb, unlike McCain, came up the hard way--like the voters in Pennsylvania. Although not known as an enthusiastic campaigner, with Obama, he may not need to be. His selection would symbolize the change Obama has been talking about.

Although i don't think he'll do it, Huckabee would be the most interesting choice for McCain. He actually has a sense of humor. But as I said, I doubt McCain will do it, picking Romney instead.

Posted by: dch | August 16, 2008 5:28 PM | Report abuse

No pick is perfect, but, that said, Biden is a great choice. He helps Obama in so many areas: positive experience, national and international stature/exposure/respect, credibility in criticizing McCain directly, plain spoken and direct, non-elitist persona, elder appeal, great debater for the VP debate, Catholic, effective public speaker, great smile, blue collar appeal, prepared to be the assisting VP Obama wants and needs, and easily seen as "ready on day one" to assume the presidency (which Constitutionally is the VP requirement).

His age and experience actually are pluses, even on a youth and change led ticket. There seems to be less for the GOP - who will scream "liberal" and nit-pick and invent - to attack about him than other VP candidates.

Had Hillary and Bill handled defeat better, we may have overlooked her poorly designed and managed campaign and her "under fire" bald-faced lying and had a chance to have her on the ticket. She failed, unfortunately, and did not pass the "qualified" test. I hate that because I had originally wanted her on the ticket.

Now, let's hope Senator Obama sees that BIDEN is the correct choice.

Posted by: Byron | August 16, 2008 5:06 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin is the worst nightmare for Barack Obama! McCain NEEDS to pick her!

Posted by: Drew | August 16, 2008 4:42 PM | Report abuse

If Lieberman gets any closer to McCain it's going to look like tantric sex.

BHO will pick Biden.

Please tell me why, WHY is Tim Kaine's name on this list? How about Cap't. Kangaroo? Kaine is long off the list! In fact anyone with half a brain knew he was never seriously ON the list.

Posted by: zoukie | August 16, 2008 4:40 PM | Report abuse

It's no accident that the most likely McCain pick was left out, that being Alaska Gov Sarah Palin. Why? Because the Dems and MSM (including Washington Post)are petrified she'll be on the ticket!

Posted by: Ted | August 16, 2008 3:40 PM | Report abuse

as has been pointed out on this site before, Bill Richardson presents a difficulty as VP. His own Lt. Gov., a woman from his own party, has publicly stated that she is uncomfortable standing too close to him and while she has not accused him of 'inappropriate' touching, she does say his "touchy-feeliness' makes her uncomfortable. I'm guessing the vetters have picked up on rumors and simply decided to stay away from Richardson. He is appealing on paper, but there are a number of choices Obama has that meet that criterion. I still think Obama is going to make his decision based PRIMARILY upon whom he imagines himself working with every day for years--someone he really likes--and I can't get past the suspicion that the real pick is NOT on the national media radar.

As for McCain (ever notice how many of us start sentences with those three words!?!) There was a time when I actually thought he was going to seize the day and get his pick out first so it would not look as though he were reacting to Obama. Now I am convinced more than ever that he has lost control of his campaign and Romney will be foisted on him.

Posted by: dch | August 16, 2008 3:10 PM | Report abuse

Lieberman has taken on an unpleasant, snotty tone since he was so roundly rejected in the Democratic primary in 2006. It's understandable why he would (you can bet his feelings were hurt), but several times he's basically said the voters are too stupid to understand why he was right in how he voted on the war. As the alienation has grown, he's started to sound like that on other topics as well. All of which is why I don't think he's a good choice for McCain, personal affinity or no.

McCain's "boring, predictable" choices aren't anywhere near as good as Obama's "boring, predictable" choices. If they go in an exciting, surprise direction, McCain could look pretty good (or disastrously bad), but if McCain ends up with Ridge or Romney, it'll definitely be a disappointment.

Posted by: Budikavlan | August 16, 2008 2:33 PM | Report abuse

In fact the more I think about it the more I think him going to Georgia himself...makes me think he is definitively the nominee for VP.

Posted by: dl | August 16, 2008 12:49 PM | Report abuse

and Jonze

I think you are dead on...

the only random factor is Mccain himself wants to pick Ridge or Lieberman.

We'll see what his state of mind is when Obama picks.

Posted by: dl | August 16, 2008 12:46 PM | Report abuse

I guess Biden went to Georgia this weekend.

Seems like the right thing for the guy who wrote the article in the washington times with Lugar...in April about us not looking at the conflict (and Mccain's sabre rattling and rough charges toward Russia just being cowboy diplomacy at it's finest ugh...none of that helping the situation) and Biden Lugar's OpEd's were really incredibly insightful... all it's details.

and the follow up he wrote this week in the financial times...

it is hard to see him not being an incredible resource for Obama's judgements.

We'll see what comes out of Georgia.

Posted by: dl | August 16, 2008 12:44 PM | Report abuse

I think John McSenile should take Rudy for VP, two womanizers on the same ticket should be a real winner.Both strong men with integrity, give me a break. OBAMA 08 Connie from Indiana

Posted by: Connie | August 16, 2008 12:40 PM | Report abuse

I think McCain's pick will be made in reaction to Obama's. If Obama picks Biden then I think McCain needs to pick somebody with experience because Biden would eat up Pawlenty in the VP debate, which is about national issues afterall. And given McCain's age, his VP choice needs to be seen as more ready "just in case". If Biden destroyed Pawlenty, it could devastate the McCain campaign. If Obama chooses Biden, then I think McCain will look to Mitt Romney, Portman or Joe Lieberman. I included Lieberman but not Ridge because while both are pro-choice which would hurt the ticket, Lieberman being a Dem and thus bi-partisan would make up for the loss in pro-life voters.

If Obama chooses Tim Kaine, that would open the door for McCain to choose Pawlenty, or even really consider Palin/Jindal.

Either Obama/Biden vs McCain/Romney or
Obama/Kaine vs McCain/Pawlenty

Posted by: Jonze | August 16, 2008 12:32 PM | Report abuse

Is no one mentioning Kantor anymore for the Republicans? There were a couple of reports about him moving up in the ranks as a possible VP choice, his pro-Israel stance and conservative credentials (super-straight Congressman from Virginia) being in his favor.

One other comment: are you including Lieberman in your top Republican 5 just to be provocative? Not that I don't believe he and McCain are sympathetic to each other's goals... but for God's sake, there are quite a few actual Republicans out there to fill the spot (not bizarre one-issue 'independents' like him) and on personality / likeability alone, Lieberman would not sway any Democrat or even Independent I know toward the Republican side.

Posted by: Brooklyn334 | August 16, 2008 10:38 AM | Report abuse

Great stuff, jakeB! You took it to a new level. I wish I -- er, BO had thought of Mugabe and Jan Van Der Sloot. But at least we agree on who's No. 304,880,601 on BO's veep long list. Stay thirsty, my friend...
_______________________________

Posted by: jakeB | August 15, 2008 8:04 PM

Slight change in order although all your "picks" are in there

1. Bob Graham
2. Patrick Leahy
3. Kaine

* * * * * * * * * * *
304,880,591. Prince (now that not a sign)
304,880,592. Lisa Lamponelli
304,880,593. Jan Van Der Sloot
304,880,593. Ron Jeremy
304,880,594. Frito Bandito
304,880,595. Mr. Bean
304,880,596. Millie Vanilli
304,880,597. Carrot Top
304,880,598. Katy Couric
304,880,599. "Ashy" Larry
304,880,600. Robert Mugabe
304,880,601. Mrs. H. R. Clinton

Ripped off from: Broadway Joe | August 15, 2008 7:08 PM

Posted by: Broadway Joe | August 16, 2008 10:03 AM | Report abuse

KEITH: "Rudy Guiliani for VP...the man changed NYC for the better in so many ways...stood up to Muslim terroists...doesn't take sh*t from anyone...articulate and intelligent...ask any New Yorker"

This New Yorker thinks Guiliani would be a disaster. He has no foreign policy, or even any anti-terrorism policy (his supposed field of expertise) except "Look tougher and crazier than they do." He has no fiscal responsibility, badly mismanaging the NYC budget. The drop in crime that happened in NYC happened everywhere else too, and the policing methods he touted were started under his predecessor, yet he takes all the credit (and wound up driving out an excellent police chief in the process). And he was a disaster on race relations.

Ask any New Yorker? Most New Yorkers were sick of him before 9/11. If he had been able to run again for mayor, he would have lost absent the terrorist attack. And let's not forget that he suggested delaying the election that November because he thought we needed him so badly (that turned out to be quite wrong, no?). So he was not only an egomaniac, he was a threat to democracy.

In short, a terrible VP choice.

Posted by: dsimon | August 16, 2008 10:00 AM | Report abuse

I am sort of surprised it's the middle of August & no VP has been announced yet. I don't even think were down to the final 10, but more like the final 7. I don't think Obama will pick Sebelius & I don't think McCain will pick Romney or Jindal. For McCain, I have always thought his best choice is Pawlenty. Pawlenty would definately excite the social conservatives McCain needs to get excited to come to the polls. Plus, Pawlenty will assure McCain the support of fiscal conservatives that are weary of him without alienating moderate dems. & independents. Pawlenty's "Sam Club Republican" motto will fit well with McCain's messege. Plus, Pawlenty can really help McCain fine tune his economic messege, as he has experience balancing budgets. The foreign policy R base elected McCain the nominee, with help from independent voters. Now, Pawlenty would really shore up the social & fiscal conservative base! Ridge is still very much in the running. Many of the one issue conservatives, if Ridge were McCain's VP choice, may not be happy with an anti-Obama messege & may well support Conservative candidate Chuck Baldwin. Pawlenty would be the best candidate for shoring up & exciting the R base.

For Obama, I think Sebelius isn't ready and many Clinton supporters would be mad if Obama choose a woman instead of Hillary. I think Reed wouldn't be that great of a choice for Obama. Obama has to win out some moderate voters, and Reed won't be able to help him do that too much. Reed's overall resume doesn't match Bidens. Tim Kaine has lost alot of buzz lately. Biden provides national security bona-fides for the Obama team, plus his personal life as a family man is enticing. His debate skills are polished and very good, too. Biden also helps Obama fight back against the "experience" factor McCain runs on. Evan Bayh is also a great choice for Obama. He has executive & senatorial experience and is well liked in a red state, Indiana. He also has some national security experience. In my view, however, Biden is the clear front runner for now. The night Obama's VP accepts the nomination is national security night.

Lieberman & Hagel are the wild cards. Lieberman has a much better shot than Hagel of getting the nod. If McCain chooses to only serve 1 term in office and then leave the Presidency, Lieberman would be the obvious choice. They are both "experience" aka "old" and if McCain ran on fixing social security, medicaid & medicare & helping to restore the dollar to really mean something and only serving 1 term as a bi-partisan legislator really concerned about the nation...Lieberman is the obvious choice. They can go to their congressional colleagues on their own respective parties in asking for help in 1 term to restore the dollar, fix the broken social security, medicare & medicaid system that is bankrupting America. They would make a better team to do something on energy independence, too. They could come up with a bill, and gather enough support, that it just may pass & be good for America. I truly believe most American's would support such a ticket.

That being said, the line!:

McCain:
1. Tim Pawlenty
2. Joe Lieberman
3. Tom Ridge
4. Mitt Romney
5. Sarah Palin

Obama:
1. Joe Biden
2. Evan Bayh
3. Jack Reed
4. Tim Kaine
5. Chet Edwards

Of these, a McCain/Lieberman ticket is the most intriguing choice. Especially if McCain/Lieberman promised to really work to solve issues so tough most politicians choose not to tackle: social security, medicare, medicaid, energy independence & only take 1 term doing it. This would soothe the age factor & get bipartisan support to give them 1 term to see what they can really get accomplished. This ticket could truly be good for America.

Reality is, though, Biden & Pawlenty are not the front-runners. They are safe party choices, and those are the odds. But a McCain/Lieberman ticket truly could be a dream ticket...but the key is if McCain only wants to serve 1 term. Then in 2012, we get 2 wide open nominating contests again in another cycle...a true political junkies dream!

Posted by: reason | August 16, 2008 9:55 AM | Report abuse

Biden had probably the second-best speech at the 2004 Convention. It was actually similar in some ways to the Obama speech, complete with him pointing to the US flag and strongly asserting that it didn't belong to any one party. Biden would be a great choice.

Posted by: vplexico | August 16, 2008 8:55 AM | Report abuse

How does McCain turn around his image of being too old and crotcthety whilst making his emerging candidacy almost unbeatable? He does it by putting Bloomberg on the ticket. This selection would emphasize his boldness, bipartisanship, concern for the economy and political smarts. Here's the Jewish candidate who actually could bring in votes (Lieberman does nothing but give McCain a buddy-buddy in the West Wing.) McCain could well capture New York, New Jersey,and Connecticut if Mike is on the ticket. Best of all, should Shwarzenegger survive his current mini-crisis in the popularity polls, California might even go in the McCain column. And if BO chooses a "safe" person like Biden or Bayh, McCain can make him look like the doddering old man in the race with such a bold choice.

Posted by: jayjay9 | August 16, 2008 8:19 AM | Report abuse

Rudy Guiliani for VP...the man changed NYC for the better in so many ways...stood up to Muslim terroists...doesn't take sh*t from anyone...articulate and intelligent...ask any New Yorker

Posted by: KEITH | August 16, 2008 7:07 AM | Report abuse

No accident you left out the most likely McCain pick, that being Alaska Gov Sarah Palin. Why? Because the MSM and Dems are petrified she'll be on McCain's ticket!

Posted by: Ted | August 16, 2008 6:07 AM | Report abuse

Can "Biden" and "charisma" be uttered in the same sentence. But perhaps because Obama is charasmatic, a "blah" figure might be okay. Biden would be a good choice for Secretary of State.

Posted by: Shirley | August 16, 2008 4:10 AM | Report abuse

dl,

You are incredibly insightful.

I enjoy your honest and well-thought posts. Great points.

Maybe BHO could use us in his upcoming streetfight!

- Bru

Posted by: Rick Bruni | August 16, 2008 2:21 AM | Report abuse

jerry25@sprynet.com

Well said.

Amen. Hallefrigginlujah!

Go Joe!

McCain, I used to respect you. Seeing as you lived through hell on earth, I will advise you - and not the radical-right mouthpieces who are currently mastering your positions and words - pick TPaw or Palin.

There's a reason the GOP went with a centrist in the first place: the conservative brand from Bush and co-president Cheney is so stained from scandal and deception that no one could buy another far-right candidate.

So live it and embrace it.

Obama, choose wisely. Running to the center in this election, isn't necessarily the key to victory - not in this year anyway.

Go Joe!

Posted by: Rick Bruni Jr. | August 16, 2008 2:16 AM | Report abuse

Come on y'all. Clearly Obama is going to choose John Edwards as his running mate. Who better to take the focus off his weaknesses...Wright, Michelle, etc.

Posted by: TC | August 16, 2008 2:11 AM | Report abuse

Can we stop with all the bigotry and silliness?

I don't know what's worse, bringing in Obama's unfortunate but irrelevant middle name, or continuing to mention non-contenders.

I'm sorry Chris, did the article mention a damn thing about HRC, Kerry, K.B. Hutchinson or Chet Edwards?!?

Don't u people read? Naw, guess not. I already knew Repubs don't read. It's much better to think ur macho and listen to dogmatics like Rush.

Pay attention: I think Chris is as close as they come. Good picks at number one by both sides if it rings true!

Posted by: Yatahey | August 16, 2008 2:07 AM | Report abuse

Thank you Chris for seeing the light about Joe Biden.

Actually he was always popular as VP in a one-on-one multiple choice matchup.

However, you Media people spent so much energy pushing people like Hillary and Edwards, that you neglected the hard facts that Biden offers Obama just what he needs.

The emphasis on Biden should be his appeal to the age 60+, Obama's weakest group (esp. Florida). They are apprehensive of Obama now, but willing to convert with Biden on board.

And yes, you guys in the Media will try to bring down Biden with all his past remarks and Jokes. However, Obama will just have to say he is Biden being Biden (Manny being Manny) and laugh it off.

As long as Obama rises in the polls, Biden will become a media darling in the end.

Posted by: jerry25@sprynet.com | August 16, 2008 2:07 AM | Report abuse

OBAMA/BIDEN......Sounds good; looks good; and just plain makes sense.

Two extremely intelligent men. Youth and Wisdom....now that's a change.

Posted by: Gloria | August 16, 2008 1:59 AM | Report abuse

I am amazed at the ignorance of liberals on this blog. The question basically is who would be a good veep pick for both candidates. I personally think that for Obama he needs to pick someone who is to the right of his party on international relations and security. Biden is a fool and would add to the distractions Obama already faces. Senator Bayh is a little known Senator from Indiana who steps to the right of Obama and may be a good pick. Sam Nunn is another low key candidate, but a well known name throughout America. Governeor Richardson is another possibility, but since Obama crumbled under the weight of the Clinton onslaught I think he will choose Nunn.
Senator McCain is a wel known name throughout America, and despite the beliefs of political freaks like myself, he is well known among the masses for being a maverick. He should focus on his reputation as being a maverick and pick someone who is unexpected. McCain should choose the Governor Rell of Connecticut or Governor Pallin of Alaska. You may not agree with me and thats cool but the fact is that there are alot of women in America who wanted to support Hillary despite her politics, and both of these women are true proven leaders that they can support. The other aspect of this is that if McCain chooses a woman, the wow factor shifts to his ticket. Obama has received way to much attention because he is a minority and wants to play that card, but If McCain were to go with a powerful female the media would be in a pickle over which story is more important and the playing field would be leveled.

Posted by: bob 70 | August 16, 2008 1:58 AM | Report abuse

I think Chet Edwards is clearly off the table for: 1. Nancy Pelosi floated him as homage and creedence to his position in Bush Country and, 2. People are generally ignorant and assume "Edwards" would mean the former VP-canidate (He's been involved in a recent scandal... have you heard?!?)

When weighing the ins and outs of Obama's pick, the choice is abundantly clear: Sen. Joe Biden.

Anything else would be a stain in Obama's judgement. The man can do what he wants and appoint whom he wants (Kaine, Sebilius) once he's in the White House.

Until then, he needs a credible attack dog who's polished on foreign policy, can bring in white, working folks and Catholics and pass the "beer test".

C'mon Obama! C'mon folks! DUH!

Obama/Biden '08

Posted by: Rick Bruni Jr. | August 16, 2008 1:48 AM | Report abuse

Rendall of Pennsylvania will be the pick

Posted by: Anonymous | August 16, 2008 1:40 AM | Report abuse

Does Evan Bayh wear a rug?!

Posted by: Lorraine | August 16, 2008 1:22 AM | Report abuse

A month ago I would've never given TPaw a chance. Only in the last week have I come to take him seriously. Romney just doesn't work - he's like the equivalent of Kerry choosing Edwards and Obama choosing Hillary all wrapped in one - and McCain seemed to never give Huckabee a chance. Then I learn that Portman was never even vetted! So I guess it's Pawlenty.
As for Obama's vp, it's hard to imagine a true dark horse outside of the usual suspects of Bayh, Kaine and Biden. I think it's strange for him to consider both Biden and Kaine. I mean, if Obama values Biden for his experience, then why the hell consider Kaine? And if inexperience is not a factor in eliminating Kaine, why care about Biden? Maybe Bayh is a way to thread the needle, and to appeal to moderates, Independents and some Republicans who still think Obama is too liberal.

Posted by: Justin | August 16, 2008 1:11 AM | Report abuse

You left out Charlie Crist, who I believe will be the choice for Republican VP....In the immortal words of Tim Russert..."Florida, Florida, Florida...." Crist came out for McCain at the crucial last moment and helped him win the nomination. Then Crist actually got married in order to make himself VP material. If you don't think THAT'S significant, you've never been married! I wish Lieberman was electable, but I feel the religious right would stay home. They won't even accept Ridge, forget Joe. No, it's Crist- he's the right age, the governor of the right state, and has had some excellent ideas on how to provide affordable healthcare without breaking the bank.
Biden would be an excellent VP candidate for Obama. He would certainly deliver Delaware.

Posted by: Scott | August 16, 2008 1:10 AM | Report abuse

Thanks,Chris,for putting Biden at the top of Obama's list of viable veep picks.I don't care what these mindless psycho-bloggers have to say ...he's simply the best pick.Plus,he's made no bones about accepting it.At the same time,he has been curiously silent.He gets it.The political trifecta is: his downsides do not undermine Obama's international inexperience and ability...his upsides are huge.After all,wasn't it you that said that Dick,uh-hum,Cheney gave the Bush-Cheney 2000 campaign the necessary 'gravitasse' to win the election because of the the revered status of,uh-hum,Cheney?
I'm doing my best to take over your job and restore dignity to the profession of journalism.In the meantime,enjoy your ride.See you on the dream team.
Oh,and,forget everything I said.It's all about 'gravetasse'.Thanks for reminded me.
Geez.

Posted by: HoosierDaddy | August 16, 2008 12:32 AM | Report abuse

For the GOP, Romney would be the worst pick possible and would almost assure McCain a loss in November. Why Huckabee wasn't mentioned in the top 5 is puzzling, especially since Jindal already said he's not in contention for the VP spot. But beings the Romniacs would have a fit if Huckabee were picked, Pawlenty is probably the best pick for McCain. Pawlenty could put MN in the GOP column.

Posted by: bearman | August 16, 2008 12:14 AM | Report abuse

It matters not with Obama. Picking any Washington insider blow his "Change" game out the window.

For McCain, Pawlenty might be good, but where is Governor Palin of Alaska. She sounded good for McCain. Best though would be Governor Bobby Jindal of Louisiana and here is why.

A look at Jindal's political career shows a man of character, judgement, and the ability to use political crossover to get things done.

Jindal has been forthright about the Republican Party saying that somehow, " we lost our way". Acknowledging you are off the path allows you to start to get back on it. A McCain/Jindal team represents the changing demographics in our country, and his executive experience and his demonstrated talents to get things done in Louisiana gives McCain the needed support to move us forward.

Jindal could be the ' nitro fuel' McCain's campaign needs, and certainly would further excite our nation as to new possibilities for our children's future.

While Obama can talk about what he will do, Jindal can show time and again what he has achieved. And Bobby can go toe to toe with Barrack in oratory gifts, making any contest with an Obama VP pick a very interesting contest.

A Jindal VP announcement right now would make for interesting decisions on the part of the media. With the networks anchors googling after Obama, who will cover a historical nomination for VP.

For that is what Bobby Jindal's selection would be.

Posted by: anotherview | August 16, 2008 12:00 AM | Report abuse

I am still hoping for Bloomberg.

Posted by: Mordecai | August 15, 2008 11:15 PM | Report abuse

I generally agree with your picks, Chris. I think Biden vs. Bayh is very close. I think the fact that Biden's senate seat would remain in Democratic hands may be the one tangible thing that may help him in the end.

I think Jack Reed is a real possibility, but it's not clear his senate seat would stay democratic either.

You say to be suspicious of the buzz.

After some Googling today, I was very surprised to find some things about Chet Edwards that could make him the rising dark horse.

Overall, from what I've found his worst attribute is that he's on par with Bayh's conservatism--yet Bayh is getting consideration.

Best things in his favor.
1. Not a senator.
2. Deep armed services/homeland security background
3. Charismatic
4. Southern
5. A new face
6. Would create a lot of frenzy since he would be a surprise pick.
7. Would do well with blue collar folks.
8. He represents George Bush's district in Texas and it would provide a nice humorous way to bring Bush back into the equation for the rest of the campaign. They could give him a line like... "I want to apologize to the American people for one of my constituents. You might know him. His name is George Bush. In Texas, we take responsibility seriously. I want to go to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave, and help clean up the cow dung he's left in Washington."

A refrain like that would help keep the focus on a verdict on the Bush/Cheney years throughout the campaign.

The one mainstream press account I saw on Edwards following his meeting with Obama was that Obama was pleasantly surprised with him.

If they get along well, he could represent a little bit of the Kaine/Sebelius outsider feel, without giving up on experience in military/security experience.

Posted by: MNobserver | August 15, 2008 11:07 PM | Report abuse

I generally agree with your picks, Chris. I think Biden vs. Bayh is very close. I think the fact that Biden's senate seat would remain in Democratic hands may be the one tangible thing that may help him in the end.

I think Jack Reed is a real possibility, but it's not clear his senate seat would stay democratic either.

You say to be suspicious of the buzz.

After some Googling today, I was very surprised to find some things about Chet Edwards that could make him the rising dark horse.

Overall, from what I've found his worst attribute is that he's on par with Bayh's conservatism--yet Bayh is getting consideration.

Best things in his favor.
1. Not a senator.
2. Deep armed services/homeland security background
3. Charismatic
4. Southern
5. A new face
6. Would create a lot of frenzy since he would be a surprise pick.
7. Would do well with blue collar folks.
8. He represents George Bush's district in Texas and it would provide a nice humorous way to bring Bush back into the equation for the rest of the campaign. They could give him a line like... "I want to apologize to the American people for one of my constituents. You might know him. His name is George Bush. In Texas, we take responsibility seriously. I want to go to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave, and help clean up the cow dung he's left in Washington."

A refrain like that would help keep the focus on a verdict on the Bush/Cheney years throughout the campaign.

The one mainstream press account I saw on Edwards following his meeting with Obama was that Obama was pleasantly surprised with him.

If they get along well, he could represent a little bit of the Kaine/Sebelius outsider feel, without giving up on experience in military/security experience.

Posted by: MNobserver | August 15, 2008 11:06 PM | Report abuse

Scrivener - I see that you're still posting the Al Gore as surprise nominee fantasy (perhaps we can have The Amazing Linguini pull him from a hat).

And, of course, when anyone disagrees with you, they're a paid disinformation troll. Neurolinguistic programming is an amusing twist.

If you're going to get into the pool, expect to get wet.

BB

Posted by: Fairlington Blade | August 15, 2008 10:24 PM | Report abuse

The election is about contrast so the greyer more experience guy Biden will win to contrast with Obama’s youth and relative inexperience. This however does not diminish the value of what Bayh or Kaine could have brought to the ticket…

Biden is also a very effective attack dog against McCain as previously demonstrated. Obama will make the right choice by going with Biden.

Posted by: citystreet | August 15, 2008 9:56 PM | Report abuse

Tom Ridge and Kay Bailey Hutchison are both a little dumb to looke really good as national candidates (not blithering idiots, but their answers to questions always sound like something a high school student wrote).

I don't see either candidate picking a member of the opposing party; even considering their outlying stances on the Iraq war, both Lieberman and Hagel joined their respective parties for many good reasons, and those policy positions would make fodder for way too much negative coverage.

I still think Chet Edwards would be a slam-dunk for Obama, but I can't think of anyone who would be as good for McCain. I do think both of them should think seriously about picking a member of the House of Representatives--they have the necessary stature to fill a national ticket but represent a degree of freshness that the "usual suspects" can't match.

Posted by: Budikavlan | August 15, 2008 9:51 PM | Report abuse

Friends from MN say it is common knowledge that Pawlenty has had numerous extra-marital affairs. One friend was familiar with two such women. Chris, there must be people you know talking about this?

Posted by: Michael | August 15, 2008 9:51 PM | Report abuse

I suspect that Biden has put his foot in his mouth too often to be a good VP pick, nor has he ever demonstrated an ability to win any votes (and Delaware is hardly a swing state). I think Sam Nunn should be ranked highly as a possible candidate, balancing many of Obama's needs and providing impeccable foreign policy credentials (especially with the re-emergence of Russia as a possible adversary). Of course, he may not be interested himself. I certainly can't see McCain choosing anyone pro-choice, and suspect his words were an attempt to display his openmindedness to a pro-choice audience. It's telling that there's been no outrage from the pro-life movement, suggesting that they know he's not serious.

Posted by: Rich | August 15, 2008 9:12 PM | Report abuse

Why has Huckabee or Mark Sampson fallen off McCain's VP list?

Posted by: Mike | August 15, 2008 9:07 PM | Report abuse

Interestingly enough no one is really mentioning Tom Ridge as a potential Veep for McCain. He's make an excellent choice. He's a vet with an impeccable service record, did a good job as governor of a traditionally democratic state, has a decent relationship with unions, is pro-choice which may not appeal to the far right base of the Republican party but might be enough to get some of the undecided dems away from Obama. Has experience as Sec. of HS.

Posted by: norbert1234 | August 15, 2008 8:54 PM | Report abuse

ANetliner

great comments...and I think a lot of people agree with you on all those points about candidates...

I think Biden as VP would be used two fold...

to double team with whoever is Sec of State (especially on russia and pakistan) and to help Obama get things through the congress. (the latter outlined really well in Joe Klein's article last week)

but really good post

Posted by: dl | August 15, 2008 8:47 PM | Report abuse

The night Lieberman lost he ran to the most important Jewish friend he knew, Larry King and spewed his guts out about how the Dems were misguided by this maniac Ned Lamont. Of course, my party caved like a deck of cards because we have a voting block we need removed, weed and feed Democrats. Let's take out Pelosi, Reid, Harman, Feinstein, Lieberman, Clyburn, Schumer, Levin, Harold Ford, Bill Nelson, Hoyer and about ten more Southerners. They are Republicans masquerading as Democrats and we need to remove them. Add Rockefeller to the list. Sebelius is the choice I believe Barack will make but perhaps he'll go outside. I like Webb. It won't be Biden because he supports killing Iraqis to privatize their oil. He probably would have been the candidate but Biden thinks white America has an ordained right to kill people for their betterment and then demand they give us their oil contracts worth hundreds of billions of dollars. This is why Biden isn't choosing the VP. It will never be Hill because Barack is smart.

Posted by: bob ii | August 15, 2008 8:47 PM | Report abuse

clark or any other solely military guy won't be picked educated or not...

that would mean

foreign policy = military and that is where Mccain wants it to be.

Obama stands for the idea of foreign policy encompassing military not BEING military.

and unless the have economic budgeting and policy proposal, experience with congress and getting bills passed, and how to create policy...

they won't be picked.

If they were Obama would not be as smart as he is.

Posted by: dl | August 15, 2008 8:41 PM | Report abuse

God I hate Joe Lieberman. Ned beat him fair and square but my party has a voting block among us, about 15 rotten Democrats and Lieberman is the head snake. It makes us invertebrates. We need some weeding and feeding. Among the dead wood I'd like replaced are Reid, Pelosi, Nelson, Rockefeller, Schumer, Levin, Jane Harman, Feinstein, Clyburn, Hoyer, and lots of other southerners. They're all Republicans in my party. Throw Harold Ford on the heap, who is unemployed for impersonating a Republican. But Lieberman is the most obnoxious of the lot. Nader was right. again. Dems need to get rid of a lot of our ole boys and gals. Put a 50 in their shirt pocket and stick them on a bus home. It won't be Biden because he and Barack are diametrically opposed to one another about Iraq. Biden probably would have been the nominee if he was smart enough not to murder children for oil contracts but he supports it. Say bye-bye Biden. He won't choose Hillary because he's smart. He might pick Sebelius or surprise everyone with no one on the list. I like Webb because he's smart and he understands the waste of war.

Posted by: Bob II | August 15, 2008 8:26 PM | Report abuse

agree with Brad (below)...
has to be Governor Romney...he has lake house in NH, has long family history in Michigan, can help deliver some mountain states (beside Utah)...Colorado / Nevada...
with electoral college potentially so close...ther can NOT be any other choice...
McCain / Romney '08

Posted by: CT Weather | August 15, 2008 8:12 PM | Report abuse

I could hardly click in the link because Lieberman's face makes me want to wretch so bad.

Yeah, I think McCain should pick him. Then we could have a criminal and a treasonous traitor in the W.H.

We can send all our money to Georgia, and kill all our kids for Israel.

Posted by: kackermann | August 15, 2008 8:10 PM | Report abuse

McCain - Perot '08 (tanned and rested, daughter is now divorced... has not had to shoot at any asians in the yard in 12 years now.)

Posted by: angriestdogintheworld | August 15, 2008 8:09 PM | Report abuse

"if Obama picks Hillary...he ...could start planning their administration right now. "

BALONEY!

Hillary would be at best a temporary boost until the press and Republicans started rehashing the Clinton scandals.

Second, Hillary and Bill have never played second fiddle to anyone and would clearly expect to share power equally with Obama. Sorry, this country doesn't need two (or three) chief executives.

Finally, if he was going to pick Hillary he would have already done so. No need to give her Tuesday night prime time speech or allow her name to be entered in nomination. Hillary is going back to Senate, case closed.

Posted by: RealChoices | August 15, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

Slight change in order although all your "picks" are in there

1. Bob Graham
2. Patrick Leahy
3. Kaine

* * * * * * * * * * *
304,880,591. Prince (now that not a sign)
304,880,592. Lisa Lamponelli
304,880,593. Jan Van Der Sloot
304,880,593. Ron Jeremy
304,880,594. Frito Bandito
304,880,595. Mr. Bean
304,880,596. Millie Vanilli
304,880,597. Carrot Top
304,880,598. Katy Couric
304,880,599. "Ashy" Larry
304,880,600. Robert Mugabe
304,880,601. Mrs. H. R. Clinton

Ripped off from: Broadway Joe | August 15, 2008 7:08 PM

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

Posted by: jakeB | August 15, 2008 8:04 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Obama will choose Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts

Posted by: bob North Smithfield | August 15, 2008 8:00 PM | Report abuse

Given that foreign policy crises such as Russia, Iran, NATO, No. Korea have become so prominent, I believe Obama will likely choose Joe Biden. His debate skills and willingness to take on the GOP neocons are also assets. Plus I sense Obama has a personal rapport with him.

Posted by: Jim in CA | August 15, 2008 7:59 PM | Report abuse

Here's an angle I haven't heard expressed more widely: if Obama picks Hillary as his running mate, he would so strongly coalesce democrats that he (and she) could start planning their administration right now.

This would allow them to really hit the ground running after the election, and could allow them to accomplish things that might otherwise be unreachable (real environmental legislation, health care, sensible tax policies, etc.)

Posted by: windserf | August 15, 2008 7:54 PM | Report abuse

Yes the Media didn't know Obama would win Iowa so now we are to believe they know what their talking about now. Bottom line Hillary will be VP for one reason the votes she can bring. Not one of the other candidates can bring 18 million votes to the table. The Republicans will rob, cheat and steal this election as they did for Bush. Obama needs numbers and big numbers to win. As Hillary has her base Obama will win with Hillary or lose with someone else.

Posted by: Jackie | August 15, 2008 7:51 PM | Report abuse

Romney, Romney, Romney, Romney...
can the base be more clear...after what McCain/Huckabee did to Romney in the West Virginia primary, & how McCain lied about Romney's timetables in the Florida primary...this is the only TRUE way to rally the conservative base...

Posted by: Brad | August 15, 2008 7:50 PM | Report abuse

Since he's already sold out to Israel, Lieberman would be the perfect match for the "Israel First" traitor McCain.

Posted by: DWayne | August 15, 2008 7:43 PM | Report abuse

It's Sebelius time, mofos.

Posted by: Counterproductive | August 15, 2008 7:35 PM | Report abuse

so here goes the script of the Movie:
"The unknown VP" -New version from the one sent 30 mins ago-:

Wednesday night:
Still no VP in the democratic party
rumours of discontent in the Clinton followers... chanting , antagonistic between factions....and here she is introduced by her daughter, with a pre-intro movie intro of the women's right to vote movement, backdrop of tearful elderly and young women at the convention floor...here she comes, Hillary lovely dressed, in a dark blue dress with a red silk scarf ... ernest, strong and feminine, does not concede... elevates carefully Obama to a historic pedestal but still does not concede, "we want to hear you tomorrow" she says... but again door open for unity, maybe....suspense is killing everybody, tv audiences glued to the TV and when we expect something to happen....nothing, day finishes, no decision , pundits scrambling under the uncertatinty, rumours of a hidden issue with Barack...but still uncertatinty and suspense
Thursday....roll call suspended, restarted Obama chosen (only 1 vote of difference between him and Hillary and the deciding vote is casted by Al Gore in favor of Obama)... suspense keeps everybody on their tippy toes, new roll call for VP is requested by Obama.... Hillary is chosen unanimously by acclamation and Bill announces her officially in tears giving a rousing and touching speach.... Confetti a galore, God Bless America in the loud speakers, pictures of soldiers directly from bagdad in patriotic embrace, 150 million viewers now glued to the TV...Close up to entrrant of Obama then inmediately, running to him, Hillary ....and then Bill in a tri lateral embrace of unity, later joined by Michelle , Al Gore , Tipper....and that is The End . Oscar caliber (script is copyrighted :)

Posted by: Anonymous | August 15, 2008 7:35 PM | Report abuse

Just go to http://www.votenic.com and see who America thinks should be the VP's.

Posted by: Brandon | August 15, 2008 7:31 PM | Report abuse

Isn't it hillarious when republican posters suggest Bloomberg for their VP? Why do you think he left your party!?!?

Posted by: Matt | August 15, 2008 7:30 PM | Report abuse

Both candidates could appoint their SECRET pick to head up a committee to screen their parties choices.

Then to the surprise of everyone; they would select themselves!!

Hey!! How knows, has it ever been tried before??;-)

Posted by: JAC | August 15, 2008 7:28 PM | Report abuse

Leeb is so heebe looking

Posted by: Kosher Guy | August 15, 2008 7:20 PM | Report abuse

TO: Senator McCain

Please pick Senator Lieberman!!!!

Posted by: JAC | August 15, 2008 7:20 PM | Report abuse

To Obama Strat Team:

I would definitely worry about the effect of Kay Bailey Hutchison. Make sure she is considered in the game theory guys!!

Posted by: KM | August 15, 2008 7:12 PM | Report abuse

so here goes the script of the Movie:
"The unknown VP":

Wednesday night:
Still no VP in the democratic party
rumours of discontent in the Clinton followers... chanting....and here she is introduced by her daughter, with a movie intro of the womens right to vote movement, backdrop of terful elderly women at the convention floor...her she comes, Hillary lovely , in a dark blue dress with a red silk scarf ... enest, strong and feminine, does not concede... elevates carefully Obama... but again door open for unity....suspense is killing everybody, tv audiences glued to the TV and when we expect something to happen....nothing
Thursday....roll call suspended, restarted Obama chosen but who is the VP (only 1 vote of diffenrence between him and Hillary and deciding vote was casted by Al Gore in favor of Obama)... suspense is killing all of us, new roll call for VP.... Hillary by acclamation and Billl announces her.... Confetti a galore 150 million viewers now glued to the TV...Obama Hillary and Bill in a tri lateral embrace of unity, later joined by Michelle , Al Gore , Tipper....and that is The End . Oscar caliber (script is copyrighted :)

Posted by: mago fafa | August 15, 2008 7:10 PM | Report abuse

We're coming to the end so this will be one of the last BO "long lists" for veep (in order of preference). Needless to say, HRC's recent "enshrine the whine" campaign didn't help her. But there is good news...I guess: she's still on the list:

1. Tim Kaine
2. Claire McCaskill
3. Chuck Hagel

* * * * * * * * * * *
304,880,591. Mark Penn
304,880,592. Bobcat Braithwaite
304,880,593. Scott Peterson
304,880,593. Charles Manson
304,880,594. Ed Asner
304,880,595. Latrell Sprewell
304,880,596. Phil Spector
304,880,597. Amelie Mauresmo
304,880,598. Toby Keith
304,880,599. Larry the Cable Guy
304,880,600. Jean Harris
304,880,601. Mrs. H. R. Clinton

Posted by: Broadway Joe | August 15, 2008 7:08 PM | Report abuse

STOP WITH THE CLARK POSTS YOU HIRED TROLLS! IT IS OBVIOUS THAT CLARK HAS ZERO CHANCE OF BEING PICKED.

Posted by: CLARKGATE | August 15, 2008 7:03 PM | Report abuse

Sam Nunn would be a disastrous pick for Obama. The lesbian and gay community would consider it a grave insult for Obama to pick the senator who led the charge for the military's hated don't ask, don't tell policy. There would be an immediate howl of protest; the next sound you would hear would be pocketbooks snapping shut on Obama all across the community.

Posted by: BZ | August 15, 2008 7:02 PM | Report abuse

Although not the most likely, the best pick for Obama is Four Star General Wesley Clark. He is the only choice who has a lot of experience (commander of NATO, commander during Kosovo) who doesn't highlight Obama's lack of experience (because Obama still have more in terms of holding elected office). Furthermore, he dispells the two biggest perceived weaknesses of the Obama candidacy: lack of experience and "foreigness." Lastly, he cancels out McCain's greatest strength, that is his heroic service in Vietnam, because as an officer in Vietnam, Clark was shot four times and still managed to command his unit. Plus, he's a white Southerner. He's smart (graduating valedictorian from West Point, while McCain graduated 95 of 97 from the Naval Academy), well spoken and telegenic without being flashy. He was in the Veepstakes until he was "soundbited" for suggesting that McCain's service is not a qualification for president. Although the Obama camp distanced itself from this comment, it shows that Clark would make a good attack dog, and is the only choice is capable of attacking MCain along this line of reasoning. He probably won't be VEEP, but he's the only strong choice without a serious downside.

Posted by: Owen | August 15, 2008 6:58 PM | Report abuse

To all the NObama groupie gutter rats that are suddenly on the Biden bandwagon,

was he measured, thoughtful,just awesome, (as the moron below claimed), when he said of NObama "well, he is clean and articulate for a black man"?

Perhaps you gutter rats agree with that assessment?

Biden is a farce. The Nobama groupies beat upon on CLinton for her war vote, which was exactly Biden's vote. His claim to fame is his foreign policy experience, and he got that vote wrong, did n't he?

That man is a disgrace. But for him and other jokers like him, Clary Tom would never be on the Supreme Ct.I guess all you Nobama groupie gutter rats support that part of Biden's experience too?

Posted by: Mediaprostitutes | August 15, 2008 6:58 PM | Report abuse

Brittany Spears would be the perfect pick for Mcain...young, vibrant and more intelligent.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 15, 2008 6:57 PM | Report abuse

marjorie proves my "movie " theory, what an ending.... women andd workers and minorities all mobilized and "fired up ready to go", unstoppable. "Love after war". Thisa is a mythical campaign and the story of a finally joint ticket of former 'enemies" is perfect

Posted by: mago fafa | August 15, 2008 6:55 PM | Report abuse

stop these postings on Clark-- they're obviously meant to detract- who are you with McCain or Hillary?

Biden is the obvious choice. Have you seen this guy speak? he's measured, thoughtful, just plain awesome.

Posted by: km | August 15, 2008 6:52 PM | Report abuse

An Obama-Clinton ticket would be a lock on the election.

Obama doesn't have to love or even like Clinton just win the election.

She would be a natural to be tasked with guiding health care through the Congress.
She's been there before!

Posted by: Marjorie | August 15, 2008 6:52 PM | Report abuse

NObama should pick a media prostitute, such as Dowd, Dionne, Rich, or Olberman.

Forget about putting a swing state in play; these media pimps collectively stole the nomination for the empty suit. He OWES them.

Or perhaps as in the case of the Nobel prize, which some times is not given to an individual but to a group, he should name the collective liberal media that, from day one, made the choice of nominee on behalf of the demcratic primary voters, as his VP pick. A perfectly symbiotic relationship, that would be.

Posted by: Mediaprostitutes | August 15, 2008 6:52 PM | Report abuse

ok, this is simple,
the build up story of a "nameless secret candidate" to be unveiled on nomination night after B. Clinton's intro... basically they create the biggest convention show of history with tv audiences around the 8o Million... and is .... Hillary the chosen VP.... days and days of press coverage will obliterate Mc Cain's convention, plus Obama becomes the definitive uniter, the Clinton's redeem, past and present joins together, north and south, black an white, women and men.....brilliant strategy, and everybody is a winner, if they do this "movie" guarantee success. Remeber the shortest distance between two points...this is what Karl Rove would do if he were are democrat, and better democrats learn if they want to win

Posted by: mago fafa | August 15, 2008 6:46 PM | Report abuse

I imagine that Democrats would be delighted if McCain chose Romney. Romney would be a sure path to disaster for the GOP ticket. As Mike Huckabee said memorably, Romney reminds working class Americans of the boss who put them out of work. Not the wisest choice in a recession. And Romney's inability to figure out what he stood for torpedoed him during the primaries. He didn't even qualify for the minors, much less the big leagues.

Ridge or Lieberman would be much stronger choices. Even Huckabee (who can at least connect with voters) would be a stronger choice than Romney.

Posted by: ANetliner | August 15, 2008 6:43 PM | Report abuse

My main concern is that McCain chooses a pro-life, pro-family candidate. We cannot afford to further alienate the base. Victory is within reach.

Posted by: James Plank | August 15, 2008 6:42 PM | Report abuse

I would love for McCain to pick Lieberman...nothing more will please me to see that dirty rat lose twice. If Obama picks Biden he makes the perfect attack dog, Biden will rip McCain another bung hole.

Posted by: Ryan | August 15, 2008 6:40 PM | Report abuse

As we don't need a black president we don't need a Hindu vice-president. Are there not enough white men to fill these positions?

Posted by: candide | August 15, 2008 6:40 PM | Report abuse

Are American presidential candidates permitted to choose foreign agents as their veeps? If not, that would seem to rule out Senator Joe Lieberman (R-Israel).

Posted by: Jeff Wagner | August 15, 2008 6:39 PM | Report abuse

Although you are technically correct, I take umbrage as a Connecticut resident that you refer to Mr. Lieberman as our Independent Senator. Mr. Lieberman is far from being independent and is nothing more than a treacherous renegade who represents Israel's neocon zealots!

Posted by: David G. Ward | August 15, 2008 6:35 PM | Report abuse

Excellent comments. Great cases made for some dark horses: Clark, Bradley, Gephardt, Richardson, Reed (but for the governor of RI being a Republican, in Reed's case).

I would be happy with any of the above, or with Bayh. I believe that Bayh would do well in the heartland, and with the conservative Democrats who supported Clinton, and that the Democratic base would come to support him. I'd also be happy with Ed Rendell, for much the same reasons-- in addition, Rendell could help deliver PA.

Biden was my pick for President. He is brilliant and has a strong command on both foreign and domestic policy, the occasional verbal gaffes notwithstanding. My concern is that Biden wouldn't be utilized sufficiently as Veep. He is too talented to let fade into the background. Biden would be a superb Secretary of State, if he is interested. And leaving him in place on the Hill to shape and shepherd foreign policy through the Senate is a good choice, too.

As to the Clinton for Veep theory: makes great sense in the short run, and no sense in the long run. Although Clinton is a great Veep choice for the campaign, she is not well-suited to be a player on Team Obama for the long haul. She and Bill would try to run their own show. I also think that there are better choices than Clinton for Sec State. Clinton has very little foreign policy experience and Iraq has been her Achilles heel. Not a good Sec State choice for Obama.

Hagel would be a fascinating Veep choice for Obama to make, but it would alienate the liberal wing of the Democratic Party. If liberal Democrats sit this out, Obama faces greater challenges in November.

I can't see any advantage to Kaine, unless limited experience and track record are advantages. My feeling is that Kaine would magnify Obama's weaknesses. I like Sebelius, but agree that choosing her would antagonize Clinton supporters.

I'd love to see Convention realize the fantasy of a Hillary revolt leading to Gore at the top of the ticket, with Obama as Veep, but it won't happen. (Among other things, Team Obama is too disciplined to allow this, and Gore doesn't seem to want the job, more's the pity.) Nice idea, though.

On the GOP side, I like Ridge and Leiberman. Both appeal to Independents and centrists, whom McCain must pick up to win. Were Condi not an architect of Iraq, she'd be a great pick, but not this year.

Posted by: ANetliner | August 15, 2008 6:34 PM | Report abuse

Mayor Bloomberg for McCain and Tony Rezko for BHO.

Posted by: Wrightface | August 15, 2008 6:32 PM | Report abuse

i believe he will choose Hillary
Build up and clever deception....

Posted by: mago fafa | August 15, 2008 6:32 PM | Report abuse

you guys are all wrong. I have a feeling obama's going to go for the big statement and pick Powell.

And McCain will probably go with Romney. if he wants to make a statement though he should go with Lieberman.

Posted by: michelle | August 15, 2008 6:30 PM | Report abuse

Oh God ... PUH-LEEZE let Obama pick Kerry. Two lim-wristed, elitist northern liberals on the same ticket? It would guarantee a McCain win.

And Chris, McCain won't pick Pawlenty. Nobody's ever heard of him and he ads absolutely nothing to the ticket. He can't deliver Minnesota and the GOP doesn't need MN anyway.

Mitt Romney is the logical pick. The economy is McCain's biggest weakness, and Romney understands the economy and the financial markets better than anyone in either party. Furthermore, he can deliver Michigan and he has a ton of money at his disposal.

Posted by: Dan R. | August 15, 2008 6:24 PM | Report abuse

On the Democratic front, Obama would be wise to go with either a straight-shooter
such as Joe Biden or even Hillary Clinton.
It would behoove both candidates to pool their strengths, he being a somewhat pragmatic thinker and she being a consummate poltician, if anything to breakdown this so-called male dominated
political world we in the US primarily live in.

Posted by: Jet-Man | August 15, 2008 6:23 PM | Report abuse

Dan R.-
Kay Bailey Hutchinson is a WOMAN?

Posted by: Kase | August 15, 2008 6:23 PM | Report abuse

I think that Sebelius is definitely Obama's best choice. In answer to Chris' question, yes he absolutely can and should name a woman who is not Clinton. The struggle we saw through the primaries would most certainly continue and I wouldn't want my ability to breathe to be the only thing between the Clintons and what they want.
But Sebelius would really help his message of change resonate in ways that the other VP candidates wouldn't.

And I seriously hope McCain picks Romney, that will make him so much more beatable. Who could possibly want that snake oil salesman? If he picked Jindal, that might spell trouble for Obama though, he's quite dynamic.

Posted by: Morgan | August 15, 2008 6:23 PM | Report abuse

Bill Richardson would be an excellent choice for Obama. Biden is my #2 pick. But Bill has it all.

Posted by: mainer | August 15, 2008 6:21 PM | Report abuse

Again-
NO republican on the DEMOCRATIC ticket!
We don't need 'em-
We don't want 'em-
It would stink up the hall!

(shiver)

Posted by: Kase | August 15, 2008 6:20 PM | Report abuse

I predict that Senator John McCain will probably pick one of the least desirable
to most of US Americans as VP material,
that is someone with the Murderous and
Traitorous qualifications of a VP Dick
Cheney.

Posted by: Jet-Man | August 15, 2008 6:17 PM | Report abuse

Sorry SWB ... McCain / Lieberman ain't gonna happen. I have a high regard for Lieberman. He's the one Democrat left on the national scene with any balls. But the right wing of the Republican Party would revolt if McCain picked him. McCain knows this.

I'm expecting either Mitt Romney, the safe pick, or a woman like Kay Bailey Hutchinson. If McCain did pick Hutchinson, it would be a master stroke. She's tough, the conservatives like her, and McCain could attract an awful lor of women who were planning on voting for Hillary Clinton.

Posted by: Dan R. | August 15, 2008 6:17 PM | Report abuse

I am putting a $1 down on the long shot... Eric Shinseki

Posted by: Bill | August 15, 2008 6:16 PM | Report abuse

Chris...what about John Kerry...obvious name recognition, shores up foreign policy/experience concerns for Obama.

Posted by: Andrew | August 15, 2008 6:12 PM | Report abuse

Wait a minute, John McCain has had extra time, compared to Obama, to get his VP thoughts in order. Why would he wait for Obama to name his VP first? Why don't he just come out and get his out of the way? I have an idea, if that is what McCain is doing, of why he would do that of course.

I still think McCain is going to pick Romney. I will be quite suprised if he didn't.

Due to some events, I do not think Sebelius will be chosen. I would be very surprised if he did. I will wait and see if he picks Biden.

Posted by: Obama2008 | August 15, 2008 6:11 PM | Report abuse

Barack-Hagel is the ticket. On many levels -- geographic/demographic, bi-partisan, military/national security experience -- hagel brings another dimension: a gunslinger, tough/smart-talking, independent approach whose main goal is to fight for the interests of the american people. McCain needs to go for youth and vitality -- someone like Paris Hilton.

Posted by: finfive | August 15, 2008 6:08 PM | Report abuse

Republicans are despicable, lying extremists. As the ad of Texas Republican Swiftboater for Lies and the book "Obama Nation" indicate, the worms will say anything and do anything during the election cycle. "Obama Nation" includes reactionary, extremist, unfounded hogwash, in a rightwing-extremist attempt to attack Obama's character, rather than his ideas. Southern conservatives who are now basically Republicans, opposed the Civil Rights movement and anti-miscegenation laws. Radical rightwingers in Congress and FOX News will do everything possible to keep a woman and a person of color out of the White House. If Republicans wanted to win fair and square, they should have put up a better candidate than tired, old John McCain. And if McCain were the maverick that he says he is, he wouldn't have hired Karl Rover's protegee, who's as divisive as George W. Bush and Jefferson Davis.

Posted by: Dr. Don Key | August 15, 2008 5:57 PM | Report abuse

Conde Rice would be McCain's worst choice.. The Democrats are doing all they can to tie McCain to Bush so why would McCain want to make their case for them by putting one of Bush's closest advisers on the ticket? Also maybe in a previous year but with Obama heading the Democrats Conde wouldn't make a dent this year in bringing over Black voters. Lastly Conde strength is foreign policy, McCain's strength is foreign policy.. where does Conde balance the ticket or even help him???

Posted by: rss | August 15, 2008 5:56 PM | Report abuse

Nadeem Zakaria-

Going with the GOP to compensate for your name...you don't HAVE to hang with republicans...(unless you WANT to)...in which case you are truly lost because they will slit your throat when they are done with you!
Token.
LOL LOL LOL

Posted by: Kase | August 15, 2008 5:55 PM | Report abuse


.
Reflecting his character as a a Kerry-like shallow, arrogant, platitude-spouting, inexperienced, elitist, narcissistic, flip-flopping gas-bag, hussein will likely pick a running mate who is so bland, unknown and undistinguished he won't even have a shadow. That is the only way the empty-suit hussein won't be upstaged.

AMNESTY-JOHN, on the other hand, needs desperately to have a competent, experienced running mate who can take over the Presidency when the inevitable occurs. That makes Romney the best choice.

/

Posted by: ALEX H. | August 15, 2008 5:55 PM | Report abuse

you forgot John Kerry!

Better late than never to respond to the Swift Boaters

Posted by: poorrichard | August 15, 2008 5:54 PM | Report abuse

Let's CC The VP Line:

1) Biden - Voted for Iraq war. Destroyed US Treasury for many generations to come
2) Bayh - Same as Biden
3) Kaine - Bush Lite
4) Reed - One senator voted AGAINST Iraq War. Fully compatible with Obama Theme. Nationally unknown. Currently traded at $3.00 at Intrade site. $1.00 @ CNN Veepstakes.

http://www.intrade.com/jsp/intrade/contractSearch/

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/veepstakes/index.html

5) Sebelius - Known as Tammy Winnett among Big Democratic donors. "You Think You Can Raise Money" should be theme song for Obama/Sebelious Team.

Posted by: Troy | August 15, 2008 5:43 PM | Report abuse

There are going to be many people jumping from windows when Barry Hussein fails to "seal the deal" in November. Both McCain and Obama are neck-in-neck in the polls the favorable media coverage and surplus of money that Senator Purple Lips has in his coffers.

Posted by: Nadeem Zakaria | August 15, 2008 5:39 PM | Report abuse

I'm astonished that the buzz around Richardson has died down so far that Obama's announced plans to be in New Mexico on Monday didn't reawaken it. Color me New Mexican, but he would be an excellent choice.

Posted by: Gail | August 15, 2008 5:35 PM | Report abuse

Condi Rice is McCain's best choice. She could be president on day one, she'd bring a historic excitement to the ticket and is approved of by conservatives. She's got it all.

Posted by: rinosaurusrex.com | August 15, 2008 5:34 PM | Report abuse

Varnson

Yeah I said I agree...Biden does not fit the image of changing out washington with a whole new washington...

but he does fit the good choice to escort the changes Obama wants to make through the halls of washington. His record for bi-partisan support and getting bills through this year (especially this year with a congress thatis ineffectual at best...broken at worst)

That is worth Gold.

and the change that Washington needs to make first (I think for most Americans) is away from the entire Bush platform for the most part.

and no one has been the face of challenging that platform from the dem side more than Biden (like him or hate him talking all the time...know one has fought weekly to change course)...

as far as the credit card companies...I don't know. I know there are a lot of fiscal conservative people (and a lot fo dems are fiscally conservative still and business friendly) agree with biden on some of those stances.

Yeah it may hurt him...and yeah he may be more likely to see the banking side of things...but if he is VP he ain't beholden to a state organization if that is what worries people.

so no ...I don't think he'd be "beholden" to them...

overall I don't think he is a perfect VP...but I do think he and Obama (and like I said wouldn't it be awesome to have Hillary as Sec of State...what her negotiations with other countries would bring more heft because of her histroy and she could gain more foreign policy that wasn't first lady in genre)

I think we could have a very effective White House like we haven't seen in a long time...in a very hard time.

Posted by: dl | August 15, 2008 5:34 PM | Report abuse

Joe Biden is the smartest choice in those five by far, I can't say it enough. He is the only one who would ADD momentum to Obama's wave of support and possibly keep it going all the way to November. He's entertaining to beat all, he's a smart guy, experienced, a great debater and quite comfortable with the national stage. I don't think he would be the 'safe' bet at all, that seems to imply he wouldn't add anything or help draw a crowd himself.

For McCain, my picks for him somehow disappeared from the running. Charlie Crist would have been my bet, and early on I was thinking he would pick Lindsey Graham. They are both somewhat centrist and they both get along well with McCain. I can see Pawlenty getting the top spot, but why would Mitt Romney be at the top when those two are such obviously better picks? Why would McCain want to run with someone he hates and probably hates him? Mitt may have the executive hair and flexible positions on the issues attractive in a GOP platform, but after awhile of campaigning he's gonna turn into what lost him the primary: a jerk.

Posted by: Grueschenka | August 15, 2008 5:33 PM | Report abuse

I'm still hoping that McCain will choose a female running mate to strike at the core of the Hillary-Obama debacle.

Posted by: Wolfcastle | August 15, 2008 5:29 PM | Report abuse

If McCain picks Lieberman then we Democrats can make fun of the ticket the way the Republicans made fun of Gore/Lieberman: Same Loserman!!! Oh the irony is almost too much!

Posted by: dre7861 | August 15, 2008 5:28 PM | Report abuse

Lisa-
You claim that "Wesley Clark is responsible for the murders at Waco."

If so, he deserves ANOTHER medal!

The ONLY tragedy regarding Waco is that any of them survived!

Posted by: Kase | August 15, 2008 5:18 PM | Report abuse

and never disinformation...ever.

This election is too important.

Posted by: dl | August 15, 2008 5:15 PM | Report abuse

Biden? Are you joking? Hmmm, let's see - Obama doesn't want to be cast as too liberal and out of the mainstream. So let's choose an extremely liberal, old, outspoken (even when he fails to use his own words), Yankee? Definitely a formula for Democratic success in the sunbelt!

Posted by: surprised | August 15, 2008 5:14 PM | Report abuse

As long as Senator Obama does NOT pick a (filthy)republican I'll be happy and will enthusiastically support the ticket. But there is no repug alive that I could support...and certainly NOT on the Democratic ticket!

Posted by: Kase | August 15, 2008 5:14 PM | Report abuse

Scrivener

Honestly (as trustworthy as an internet comment can be)

not paid.

Just a guy who loves to debate and moved to NH 4 years ago just to take part in the thick of it.

In fact use to love McCain, Hillary, and Biden and Dodd.

but then I saw every candidate speak...many times over last year...

I'm a junkie what can I say.

A junkie but not a troll. although I walk the line I know with some of my words... ...I apologize.

but ...I think so do you.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 15, 2008 5:13 PM | Report abuse

"The Fix neglects a plus for Reed. He is among the Senators who voted AGAINST the Iraq war resolution. Biden did not."

Agreed. If Obama picks a candidate who voted for the war, that candidate MUST have a good response to the questions that will come up on the topic. The issue sunk Hillary Clinton and could threaten to do the same. Apparently, saying "Bush tricked me" isn't going to do it.

Posted by: DDAWD | August 15, 2008 5:10 PM | Report abuse

McSenile is such a wimp, waiting on Obama to pick first.If he was such a leader and he thought he was right he should name his VP first. Connie from Indiana

Posted by: connie | August 15, 2008 5:07 PM | Report abuse

Biden a "safe" choice? That's ridiculous. He's a very smart man who says a lot of very stupid things, and his ego barely fits within Delaware's borders. DE is not terribly rich in electoral votes, either.

The question is who can help Obama stand up to the pressure, abuse, and general sh*tstorm not just of the campaign, but of holding the office. He also needs national security bonafides without picking an Iraq War proponent.

If it's not Chuck Hagel I am going to be extremely disappointed. I also wish it could be Richardson, but he must have not survived the initial vetting for some reason.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 15, 2008 5:05 PM | Report abuse

kombayn said:

I think Barack Obama should choose Wesley Clark as his VP.

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

Wesley Clark is responsible for the murders at Waco.

Throughout Yugoslavia he used depleted uranium, cluster bombs and other prohibited weapons.

Wesley Clark is a war criminal.

Posted by: Lisa | August 15, 2008 5:05 PM | Report abuse

dl:

Your apology is noted, but your "neurolinguistic programming" (NLP) speaks for itself. I suggest you re-read your post, the parts about "silly" and crazy" and "spite." Could you be trying to impart a message here?

Anyone who's interested can Google the term.

And thanks for the story idea. I'm getting right on it. Here's the headline:

B.O.L.O. INTERNET BLOGGERS AND COMMENTATORS: HOW TO RECOGNIZE PAID 'DISINFORMATION TROLLS'

Posted by: scrivener | August 15, 2008 5:05 PM | Report abuse

Rob Portman. Look at his resume on Wikipedia. The resemblance to that of Bush Sr. before he was chosen as Reagan's running mate is almost eerie.

The same bunch of background party insiders who insisted that Bush be on Reagan's ticket and who really wanted to see Cheney be their man in the Bush Administration are not going to sit this election out. McCain is not their guy and never has been. But McCain has to play ball with them right now in order to get elected, if he wants the money and political campaign talent that they can command. You can tell that he's playing ball with them by looking at the people who came in after his campaign shake-up, the new tone of the campaign and the new influx of money recently.

But what are they getting out of it? What is this bunch of oilmen, CEOs and political operatives going to get for their time and money? McCain is known for being uncontrollable and once he gets into office there's no reason to think he will still play ball.

So they need one of their own on the ticket, keeping an iron in the fire. If you look at all of the names tossed around for running mates, only Rob Portman has the kind of resume that indicates he'd be their guy. Served as a deputy counsel to Bush Sr. as well as a promotion after that in the same administration. Solid record for them in Congress. Ran OMB and did a stint as a diplomat under Bush Jr., and actually left without putting out a 'tell all' book or otherwise betraying his bosses in the manner that so many other former officials did.

This is why I think it's going to be Portman. He's a steady hand whom the old-time party insiders can trust and predict and count on to be their man for the next 4-16 years, depending on fortunes at the ballot box. This, I believe, will be the one thing that McCain has to do in exchange for all that institutional party support from former enemies.

Posted by: Jackson Landers | August 15, 2008 5:05 PM | Report abuse

Wes Clark is chump change in a Clinton-Obama deal, and the highest he could aspire is the role of Defense Secretary.

Chris made the best case for Biden that anybody could make. Too bad for the plagiarism part. I'd still go with Biden over Bayh. On a national scale, Bayh is a virtual unknown.

Let Kaine fix Northern Virginia's transportation woes.

That leaves the question of the role Hillary will play in an Obama administration.

As for McCain, Lieberman would be the most interesting pick (besides Carly Fiorina). But In a Red and Blue world, Tom Ridge is the more likely candidate.

Best Regards,

M.

PS. Good job Chris on The Fix. I didn't realize until recently that you post several entries a day.



Posted by: mihnea | August 15, 2008 5:01 PM | Report abuse

DL-

Would you agree that Biden undercuts Obama's message of change? You can't get much more Washington or Senatorial than Biden.
Biden is an expert on foreign policy, but the contrast between he and Obama seems too striking.
And, critics will point out that credit card companies will be well-represented in the White House if Biden is number two.

Posted by: Varnson | August 15, 2008 5:01 PM | Report abuse

Jack Reed would be a perfect choice since he is widely respected int he Armed Services world AND he voted against the war with Iraq. He would be impossible to paint as another northern liberal and would add some needed weight (and I mean that in a nice way) to the ticket.

Posted by: Pat Crowley | August 15, 2008 4:58 PM | Report abuse

Democrats for John McCain in 2008.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 15, 2008 4:57 PM | Report abuse

I think it will be Sam Nunn for Obama and Condoleezza for McCain, if she's willing to continue selling her soul to the neocons.

The Russia-Georgia war was not only provoked by Bush/McCain to create a new threat, but to give McCain and Rice a chance to strut their foreign policy stuff.

Posted by: boomer babe for Obama | August 15, 2008 4:54 PM | Report abuse

Joe Biden would be a disaster. Not only will the plagiarism come out again, but he is famous for his verbal blunders. The guy is an empty suit.

The only pick for Obama is: Richard Gephardt who will win Missouri, give Obama veteran advice, Congressional counsel and foreign policy know how and bring labor along. Plus he is a good campaigner and well vetted.

Posted by: Joe | August 15, 2008 4:52 PM | Report abuse

What's happened to Lindsay Graham for McCain? If Obama is smart enough to pick Biden, all of those on the McCain top five will fail to measure up. Seems like L. Graham could go toe-to-toe with Delaware Joe on experience, foreign policy expertise, etc.

People keep mentioning Richardson... he was a lousy campaigner (he's more of a diplomat than a speechmaker) and he does have that problem of hugging women who don't want to be hugged.

Posted by: hm | August 15, 2008 4:51 PM | Report abuse

I think Barack Obama should choose Wesley Clark as his VP. He is a respected member of the party, is relatively known to the American people, trumps John McCain on foreign policy experience, a Clinton supporter, has netroots support and is a Washington Outsider. If Obama is smart, he'll shock the MSM and pick Wesley Clark.

For John McCain, I think it's obvious that he should pick Mitt Romney. He'll put Michigan, New Hampshire, Colorado, New Mexico and Nevada all into play and possibly into their corners. I would check-out this website...

http://www.electoral-vote.com/

You can see that Romney can help McCain win this election, it'll alienate the Evangelical base but it's about the Economy right now more than anything.

So if I was a betting man, I would go with Obama/Clark vs. McCain/Romney this election.

Posted by: kombayn | August 15, 2008 4:50 PM | Report abuse

The Fix neglects a plus for Reed. He is among the Senators who voted AGAINST the Iraq war resolution. Biden did not. Bayh did not Reed also voted for the Levin Amendment that would have modified the war resolution to require another UN resolution to authorize force. Biden, Bayh and Clinton were among the Democrats who didn't want to be outmachoed before the 2004 elect, and were on the other side of both votes.

Posted by: brombonz | August 15, 2008 4:48 PM | Report abuse

CBusguy

You may be right but I am pretty sure she is not going to be the VP. Too much downside.

I really would love to see her Sec of State...

can you imagine how much gravitas she would have to other heads of state and Prime Ministers and governments...

and how much stronger she would be come a time when she might run again...and I don't think Biden will personally.

To have Obama Biden Clinton being the three dealing with the world is a pretty heady team...

but I just don't think the "her forcing him" thing would go away, the fact that she would not have a national security Night as her theme....and as crazy as this may sound...if something happened to him the first thought out of a lot of (I would even risk saying most) people's heads unfortunately would be "hmmm" and she might be dogged by that...as silly as that sounds....

there is a ohst of other negatives...

not that I wouldn't like her...I just think if he is the kind of CEO that i think he is...he's picking Biden.

Posted by: dl | August 15, 2008 4:48 PM | Report abuse

There's only one VP candidate who can leap either candidate onto the front page.

MICHAEL PHELPS.

Nuf sed.

Posted by: Humph. | August 15, 2008 4:45 PM | Report abuse

and scrivener

I'm not a troll (I might look like one ...the cute troll kind I think lol)

I argue on facts because I'm interested...and I am political junkie (obviously)

I don't hurl insults...I call arguments stupid when they are...not people.

I apologize if I sounded like somebody insulting you and not your argument.

but I don't think I did.

Posted by: dl | August 15, 2008 4:41 PM | Report abuse

Scrivener, dI and friends
Excellent discussion, I think both of you made some nice points.

C'mon though, anyone remember the Obama, Clinton meeting at Feinstein's house?

They are both extremely intelligent people and shrewd politicians, they planned the convention then and there;

All the delegates making the role call vote...
Clinton comes in a close second...
Obama joins her onstage...
Declares her the winner of the VP due to her millions of supporters...

The media had it right 3 month ago but in the drive to find a "new" story cast off their first, accurate impression.

Posted by: CBusGuy | August 15, 2008 4:40 PM | Report abuse

Obama was going along just fine, logic wise, until he allowed the Clintons to hi-hack the Convention. Now, his decision making process is suspect.

Posted by: Damion | August 15, 2008 4:38 PM | Report abuse

Scrivener

I didn't hurl insult

I was just telling you when you say things that sound kinda crazy... people shut off.

that's all.

You would be more effective if you argued with reality based arguments.

sorry.

Posted by: dl | August 15, 2008 4:37 PM | Report abuse

Pawlenty for McCain; he's been on the bandwagon the longest. I thought Crist was on the radar when he decided to go to the altar....And it should be Crist, to make sure he locks up Florida.

Bayh for Obama

Notice that Bayh & Pawlenty are on the same Sunday morning talk show this weekend!!!

Posted by: Homer | August 15, 2008 4:36 PM | Report abuse

Obama-Kilpatrick '08
"THe Dream Team"

Posted by: BlueCollar | August 15, 2008 4:35 PM | Report abuse

dl:

I confess. I may have been fooled again. By you. Personal insults, and you continue to hurl them in each post, are the mark of paid disinformation "specialists" who troll this blog with an ulterior motive.

Why else would you inject such invective?

The training manual apparently forgot to include the part about "sticks and stones."

You convince no one by spewing insults.

What a waste. Have a nice day.

Posted by: scrivener | August 15, 2008 4:35 PM | Report abuse

and Kind671

I agree with you that Biden's history and years would not fit the change the politicians message...

but ...2 things...

Biden is the one face/voice we have heard for almost 7 years every week practically as the voice (like it or not) that was arguing to change the policies we have implemented... and I think that is actually the change that is most important to the electorate right now.

and second...I commented on here once how my Dad in the last few years he worked for Polaroid and they ahd become fat lazy cats going down the tubes... and how there was a faction that kept telling them you need to change and pick up on your "r&d" but the old corporate heads and board were too nervous at these crazy upstarts wanting to change.

To this day my dad says he wished that one of those old upstarts had walked some of that new management into the offices and was on board and showed he trusted the new guys in R& D.

Polaroid would still be one of those key American companies built out of invention and hard work...and who adapted.

Change is hard. Familiarity walking next to change makes it easier.

Posted by: dl | August 15, 2008 4:33 PM | Report abuse

Responding to SDR55's question:

I recall reading somewhere that Sen. would be able to do both (run for re-election and be the nominee).

Posted by: Anonymous | August 15, 2008 4:27 PM | Report abuse

sdr55

yeah he can

Posted by: dl | August 15, 2008 4:26 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Anonymous | August 15, 2008 4:25 PM | Report abuse

If Biden is picked, he's up for reelection this year, what happens? Does anyone know if he can run for both vp and senate the same year under Delaware law, as LBJ did in Texas 1960 and Lieberman in Connecticut in 2000?

Posted by: SDR55 | August 15, 2008 4:23 PM | Report abuse

well, Scrivener

Your wrong....

you also must have enough common sense to realize that a candidate like Obama who attracts the support and crowds (and numbers in the polls against a guy like John McCain)

after going through the battle against THE CLINTONS

obviously is a candidate that it would be stupid to call "unelectable"

c'mon there must be one little bit of reality still in your head right?

You sound "whacko when you call Obama "unelectable" that is weird for people to read when they see the crowds and the polls and ...everything in front of their faces.

Those are the comments that make people ignore your comments... because they are silly and/or crazy.

I hope it's just the former...and it is silliness out of spite...

Posted by: dl | August 15, 2008 4:23 PM | Report abuse

I say leibermann for mccain, that way it will make it easier for obama to win

LOOK
McCain Ad Response 2 Obama’s DHL Ad

Posted by: Anonymous | August 15, 2008 4:23 PM | Report abuse

MY ONLY OTHER PRAYER (ASIDE FROM OBAMA ACTUALLY BEING ABLE TO WIN IN THIS COUNTRY!!) IS THAT HE TRULY HELPS HIMSELF BY PICKING JOE BIDEN..EVERYONE WHO POSTED GAVE MY REASONS..GOD BLESS AND GOD HELP AMERICA AT THIS TIME!!!

Posted by: ELLEN BLAKE | August 15, 2008 4:22 PM | Report abuse

"Hillary at his side gives him a slim shot. But only slim. I still think he's unelectable. It was a 'fairy tale,' just like Bill said."

The "fairy tale" Bill was trying to convince people about was Obama's stance against the Iraq war, not his candidacy.

If you're going to slur Obama, at least get the slurs straight.

Posted by: bondjedi | August 15, 2008 4:20 PM | Report abuse

"Hillary could take the nomination away from him if she wants to."

That is patently absurd. She had four months of primaries to do just that, and couldn't do it.

"I still think that's the best way to ensure a victory in the fall... if Hillary thwarts Obama, throws her delegates to Gore, and waits for the SupCt seat to open up. And Obama gets the VP job and a shot at POTUS in '16."

Don't forget to add an eye of newt to this formulation.

"Obama's only shot at the nomination is giving the VP slot to Hillary."

You are right in that he has only one shot, except that shot was winning the primaries.

Posted by: bondjedi | August 15, 2008 4:17 PM | Report abuse

dl:

I have enough common sense to see that Obama is tanking just before the convention.

Look at the battleground states' polling. Wait 'til next week's polls, after Barack's AWOL Hawaiian adventure. It will only get worse.

He lost me when he flipped on FISA, gun control, broadening the death penalty, vacillating on offshore drilling, his vagaries on church-state co-mingling, his associations with the likes of Rezko and Rev. Wright... need I go on?

He is going to lose, maybe even with Hillary propping him up on the ticket. He lacks the experience, and he abandoned principle. And then there's the endemic racism in this country, the people he can't reach due to their ignorance and hatred. Flip-flopping only makes him look weaker to the people who probably wouldn't have considered voting for him in the first place. Had he hewed to his original positions and values, he'd be doing much better. He betrayed his base... how do you expect him to carry the rest of the electorate? Can't you read the handwriting on the wall. It says "LIKELY LOSER."

Hillary at his side gives him a slim shot. But only slim. I still think he's unelectable. It was a "fairy tale," just like Bill said. People fell in love with "the idea," just like Geraldine said.

The only way he gets the nomination is to pick Hillary. I hope she refuses, but maybe she won't, because as a defeated VP candidate, she can always say "I told you so" and try again in '12.

Posted by: scrivener | August 15, 2008 4:14 PM | Report abuse

dl, I agree with you about Sen. Clinton as Sec. of State if she's not the Vice Presidential nominee. That would be great. The advantage for Gen. Wesley Clark as opposed to Sen. Biden is that Gen. Clark fits MUCH better with the campaign message of new leadership and a new politics. Sen. Biden would be the opposite, not that I'm against him, I just think it wouldn't fit the main message of the campaign that their about change.

Posted by: Kind671 | August 15, 2008 4:12 PM | Report abuse

If McCain was up in the polls he could choose "who he likes personally" but he's NOT!!! The big issue this year will be the economy and Romney is the best person McCain can choose to help him deal with it. Second this will be a close election McCain will most likely have to steal a large Blue state because Obama will almost certainly steal 1 or 2 Red states.. Michigan is McCain's best place for a steal and Romney gives him his best chance to win it. Not to mention Romney can also help McCain win Colorado and Nevada because of the large Mormon voting block there, Most Conservatives warmed up to Romney in the primary so they would approve and with his ability to raise money Romney should be a lock.. I just hope McCain's "gut" tells him the same thing...

Posted by: rss | August 15, 2008 4:07 PM | Report abuse

jc

I think you are on with the statement about Obama picking Biden as VP (because I see very little chance of Clark...even with a wed night "National security theme" (considering Joe Biden is already listed as talking about that specific issue)

too many issues and missing pieces for Clark.

but I think Biden VP and Clark is at the top of the list for sec of defense if Obama doesn't keep Gates on.

and personally I would like to see Hillary for Sec of State ...not Richardson...then she could beef up her own foreign policy stuff.

Posted by: dl | August 15, 2008 4:03 PM | Report abuse

How much stock does Biden still have in facilitating a weak Iraqi central government loosely draped over three distinct and separable parts, Shia, Sunni and Kurd? Such would seem to be an impediment.

Posted by: First Mouse | August 15, 2008 4:02 PM | Report abuse

Scrivener

I hate to tell you but it's true...

Many of the supers (I mean even if you don't know the supers it is common sense)

Many of the supers are people who have fought for democratic issues for decades...

they are not going to be loyal to Clinton over the chance of looking like a divided electorate at the convention. Many of them pledged way back because she was the "presumptive nominee" before the primaries started. They pledged loyalty to the person they thought was going to be President. That is no longer the case...and they really don't and aren't worrying about repercussions anymore from the Clintons.

When Obama clinched the nomination they suddenly became free -er to vote Obama.

So yes you need to face the fact that those people can switch and have...we will see it at the convention.

You must have enough common sense to realize that what I am saying makes sense even if you thought I was making it up.

The numbers are going to be very different than what they were at the close of the primaries.

Posted by: dl | August 15, 2008 3:55 PM | Report abuse

I hope it is General Wes Clark. I think he would be perfect. The mainstream media including, I think Chris Cilizza, believes he's a doofus as a campaigner, but I and I believe a lot of other people disagree with this. I think he would be one of the best nominees the Democrats have ever had!

Posted by: Kind671 | August 15, 2008 3:53 PM | Report abuse

I'm not sure how HRC has shown herself to be a team player, but I don't rule out her being chosen as VP candidate. She hasn't done any campaigning for Obama and she could've put all this mess about putting her name in for Pres nominee to rest by telling her supporters to cut it out and get with the party.

To Re:Jack Reed, thanks for the information. Such a scenario makes Sen. Reed much more of a possibility in the eyes of the "speculators". I think he'd be a good fit.

I can in no way see Hagel agreeing to serve as a VP under Obama. There is no way he could endorse the party's platform and why would a candidate for Pres want a running mate who does not endorse his own party's platform?

I was sad to see Mark Warner seemingly eliminated from contention when he was listed as keynote speaker at the convention. I think he would've been a better choice than Kaine if you are going for someone from VA.

Bayh and Biden may be boring, but if you were picking a running mate, would you want someone who is going to outshine you? What running mate has been anything but boring? Edwards, while being young, is hardly a dazzler on the stage. Cheyney would fall asleep at his own speaches. Lieberman is as exciting as a rock. Gore was (and still is) a bit of a bore (even though he has great things to say, he is NOT an exciting person to watch). And so on, and so on.

I can only imagine the reaction from the conservative Evangelical Christians if McCain picks a pro-life orthodox Jew from CT as his running mate. If you think the "average Joe in middle America" has trouble grasping Obama's faith and religious beliefs, just try to get them to understand Orthodox Judiaism. It would be a fun spectacle to watch, for sure.

I think Obama is just as likely to pick someone COMPLETELY off anyone's radar screen as he is to pick one of the top 5 mentioned here. That's what makes it all so interesting to watch and wait for!

PG

Posted by: PeixeGato | August 15, 2008 3:51 PM | Report abuse

((scrivener

the reason he acquiesced to Clinton is because the numbers are going to be much more slanted to Obama than PUMA people expect.))

No, I don't think so.

Hillary could take the nomination away from him if she wants to. I still think that's the best way to ensure a victory in the fall... if Hillary thwarts Obama, throws her delegates to Gore, and waits for the SupCt seat to open up. And Obama gets the VP job and a shot at POTUS in '16.

Obama's only shot at the nomination is giving the VP slot to Hillary. I hope she refuses. But I've been scratching my head at how Obama could cave in to her like he has, and CBusGuy's scenario is the only way it makes sense.

If CBus is wrong, then Obama shouldn't be elected dog-catcher, because it will show just how politically green and naive he really is. But I won't believe he's that clueless until I hear who he picks for his VP.

(And if it's Hillary, he should do it this coming week, so that there's time for the celestial choirs to sing out loud leading up to the convention...)

Posted by: scrivener | August 15, 2008 3:49 PM | Report abuse

Wes Clark is a Rhode Scholar with a degree in economics. And I like the balance of having someone viewing situations through a military lens and Obama viewing things from a civilian lens. Biden should be Sec. of State. He has experience dealing with diplomats. Or you could switch that and make Biden the VP and make Clark Sec. of Defense. I just think Clark articulates complicated issues very well. Besides, I just don't think Obama is going to select someone that voted for this war in Iraq as his VP.

Posted by: jc | August 15, 2008 3:44 PM | Report abuse

What's interesting regarding Sen. Lieberman is that if he IS the choice, does that mean the Republican Vice Presidential nominee will continue to caucus with the Democrats? And if not, does that mean that Republicans will control the Senate with Vice President Dick Cheney breaking any 50-50 ties? Love to hear everyone's thoughts about this!

Posted by: Kind671 | August 15, 2008 3:40 PM | Report abuse

looking into the crystal ball I see another face, fainter, but somehow doesn't go away--Jim Webb--I would bet, the last guy on earth John McCain would want to see. The McCain picture is cloudier because he doesn't have very many great choices. I think he'll go safe with Romney.

Posted by: dch | August 15, 2008 3:37 PM | Report abuse

Topper, you're right on. Richardson fits everything Obama needs: FP experience, not too old, not too young, help with Western states, Hispanic, etc. etc. What else could you ask for? Obama/Richardson '08!

Posted by: the professor | August 15, 2008 3:21 PM | Report abuse

Biden - yes! For so many reasons, yes.

Posted by: Mark | August 15, 2008 3:20 PM | Report abuse

Obama's pick: Joe Who? I'm willing to bet Joe who? is a more common response among your blue collar voters than if Joe backs him then I'll back him. They may recognize the name, but that is not the same as knowing who he is. Not that Biden won't be the selection, but if that is the logic than Obama and his team are as disconnected as the Republicans claim. Richardson and Kaine would be the most intelligent choices, but dismissing Bayh as a betrayal is ludicrous. The country doesn't want a liberal, they want not a Republican who doesn't scare them too bad. Bayh and Kaine won't scare anybody who might think about voting Republican.

You can win or you can be right, you can rarely be both.

I do agree with The Fix that Obama will go with what he considers the "pragmatic" choice (or as I call it the 'prevent defense' choice.) Whoever that is.

As for McCain, if Obama picks Kaine (or maybe Bayh) he needs to go with TPaw to counter their appeal to his socially conservative base. Anyone else and it should be Crist. There is plenty of dirt at DHS during Ridge's tenure and do you really want that in a running mate? As for Lieberman, I think he is the one Democrat/Independent you could pick who would not be seen as a bipartisan move. It would be seen as Joe "self-serving" Lieberman trying to spite the Democrats while positioning himself for the Presidency (think he doesn't have a grudge over his dismal 2004 run.)

Posted by: muD | August 15, 2008 3:20 PM | Report abuse

It's not going to be Clark

that is a stupid choice...

Like I said outside military what does he bring?

and even his military foreign policy will all put foreign policy through a military lens...

that is bad for Obama.

and the playing field McCain wants.

It won't be Clark.

If he had some kind of success dealing with getting things passed or economic background or policy creating background or...

it's not going to be Clark.

Posted by: dl | August 15, 2008 3:19 PM | Report abuse

my personal preference ratings

1. Biden - Pros: funny, attack dog, foreign policy. Cons: loose lip
2. Hagle - Pros: (R), foreign polics, anti-iraq, Cons: (R)> liberal
base wont like him, anti-abortion
3. Kaine - Pros: change cand, early supporter, Virgina, Cons: no
foreign policy, no economics
4. Bayh - Pros: Indiana, some foreign policy, hillary supporter
Cons: boring, earlier he was very much for iraq war

Most likely (not necessarily my choices)

1. Biden
2. Bayh
3. Kaine
4. Hagle
5. Clinton

^^Obama WANTS to pick hagle, but can he be nominated?
^^Clinton has been a team player and shows she can support
him, but will it destroy obama as a new, change candidate
^^ bayh may bring indiana
^^ obama also would like to pick kaine, but he may be able to
win virgina w/o him, unlike bayh where he probably needs
him to win indiana

Posted by: sean | August 15, 2008 3:19 PM | Report abuse

scrivener

the reason he acquiesced to Clinto is because the numbers are going to be much more slanted to Obama than PUMA people expect.

I know (personally) a couple of people who are supers who were loyal to Hillary and pledged to her but they have switched their pledge to the issues...which means at this point to Obama.

There are a lot more Clinton supporters (and Clinton supporter superdelegates) that care about the issues and the people they effect than a grudge or one candidate.

So I do not think that means he said okay because he is going to pick her a sa VP. There would have been a lot more push from her to quiet her supporters that were still making noise if that were the case.

Posted by: dl | August 15, 2008 3:15 PM | Report abuse

Obama's choice will be Wesley Clark. All the signs are there, and it makes sense on a lot of levels. First, it blunts the John McCain/war hero story. Clark graduated first in his class from West Point, served 4 tours in Vietnam and won a Silver Star and Purple Heart there. And unlike John "Swift Boated" Kerry, he didn't come back and protest. Second, he is a Clinton-ite, and it would be seen as a nod to Bill and Hill and their foreign policy credentials. Third, he helps immensely with military/foreign policy credentials. Fourth, the theme for the night of the convention the VP will be announced is Securing America’s Future – same name as Wesley Clark’s PAC. Fifth, Bill speaks that night – who better to introduce the country to Clark than the President he served under. Sixth, who better to help navigate European issues like the Georgia-Russia conflict than the Supreme Allied Commander of NATO in Europe. And finally, he's an outsider who fits with Obama's "change" campaign, having never held office in Washington.

I know he is rumored to be out of the country during the convention - that could either be a smoke screen, or he could simply have scheduled something long ago - do you really think he would turn down a VP position because he had an overseas trip planned?

Posted by: readingthetealeaves | August 15, 2008 3:15 PM | Report abuse

Topper (1:42PM),

It's obvious you still don't know the difference between a crock pot and a chafing dish.

Posted by: Optimyst | August 15, 2008 3:14 PM | Report abuse

Obama is a good manager (evidence = this campaign) but he is particularly good at hiring decisions (see evidence above). I am confident I'll like what I see with his VP choice and that it will be a smart decision. But I can't wait to hear about it.

McCain is so totally unpredictable with this campaign that surely, by definition, it's impossible to predict which part of his Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde candidacy will do the picking, and thus who will be picked.

Posted by: Fairfax Voter | August 15, 2008 3:11 PM | Report abuse

I think Wesley Clark is perfect. I wish it were Clinton but I don't think it is in the cards.

Posted by: Narnia | August 15, 2008 3:11 PM | Report abuse

and I have to say if it wasn't going to be Biden...

Obama campaign would have leaked something at this point because the wave of approval for an Obama/Biden ticket seems to be tsunami at this point...

don't you think Chris?

and if he switches with all this fervor that seems almost out of control...

could be a huge buzzkill...I think they know that and would have dealt with it by this afternoon.

Posted by: dl | August 15, 2008 3:11 PM | Report abuse

Bill Bradley would be an outstanding pick and he and Barack would slaughter any pair of World Leaders in two on two.

Posted by: Robert Luciano | August 15, 2008 3:11 PM | Report abuse

JUST GOT ON THE BUS, GUS. IT'S HILLARY FOR OBAMA!


Just read cBusGuy's analysis:

May I please change my prognostication, should Barack actually get the nomination, to Hillary Clinton?

That's the only way Obama's capitulations to her make any sense. With Hillary as VP, it all comes together wrapped in a pretty pink bow. And the PUMA is tamed. Brilliant.

But she better well divorce Bill before November so he can do his thing without doing her any more harm. Americans will look the other way if the proper papers are filed.

One more prediction: cBusGuy will be hired by WaPo as Cillizza's successor. JUST KIDDING!

Posted by: scrivener | August 15, 2008 3:09 PM | Report abuse

...way back when, my first choice for the D ticket was Biden/Obama. Looks like I may still get my ticket, only reversed.

Pro's and Con's for Biden as VP have been laid out and pretty well exhausted. Seems to me the positives far outweigh the negatives...my prediction: Biden announced as VP Monday.

Posted by: purplemartin | August 15, 2008 3:06 PM | Report abuse

Like I said before a Clark pick would be bad...great guy seemingly...charming...

has a military strength and leadership...

2 reasons ...that it wouldn't be...

A Clark or any military choice at this point puts all foreign policy debate through that lens. Where McCain wants it... ...and even with a Clark McCain wins.

Obama should not be swayed that way.

and second...that's all that Clark brings.

and obama's change message more importantly than picking a change candidate or new face...is more challenged by being able to make the "changes" that Obama is proposing....through congress.

That means that ability has to be high on the priority list.

Clark has none of that ...or any economic background for that matter.

Posted by: dl | August 15, 2008 3:05 PM | Report abuse

Biden all the way!!!

Obama/Biden 2008!

Posted by: dabNY | August 15, 2008 3:04 PM | Report abuse

I think McCain will pick Ridge or Pawlenty.

I LOVE Biden but I think the Dems will be in for a surprise--I think Obama/Clinton will be the ticket. I was totally against this back in June but I think things have quieted down and I think she has proven herself a team player and a much more likely pick. I am not even against it as I was as I think the Obama campaign will tout her own change record and having an Af-Am and woman on the ticket wil underscore that. As for Bill--I thik we need to institute a special Presidential Envoy to India, China and Russia (ICR) these three countries need to be brought into the fold and quickly and need a special hand and a lot of dedicated time--enetr Bill, who will report directly to Pres Obama. These three will have special status as "growing superpowers" as well as command over a LARGE amount of the world's population.

Posted by: chadibuins | August 15, 2008 3:00 PM | Report abuse

The theme for that night is Securing America. Wesley Clark's PAC is themed, Securing America. I think it will be Clark. That would put a lot of minds at ease with the wars we are fighting and especially with the events taking place in Georgia. The Dems would really have a guy that "knows how to win wars". Not to mention he's a southern White guy. That couldn't hurt.

Posted by: JC | August 15, 2008 2:59 PM | Report abuse

Biden is a snoozefest..saw him on the stump in Iowa...no thank you!

Posted by: UnionLabel | August 15, 2008 2:58 PM | Report abuse

FOR VP: BARACK OBAMA.

Al Gore will choose Barack Obama as his vice presidential running mate after the Hillary convention putsch/delegate toss.

And the Dem masses will cheer and breathe a grateful sigh of relief, while Republicans break out in a cold sweat.

Should the Dems insist on electoral suicide by personality cult, then look for Obama to choose Wes Clark. The ticket would benefit from military representation (heck, it could prevent a coup) as well as the foreign policy chops that Clark brings.

And it's a nice sop to the Hillaristas.

I really doubt the cautious Obama would go with a VP selection that fails to meet the "first, do no harm" test that Chris discussed yesterday. Has he forgotten?

On the GOP side, McCain won't go with Portman because he appears to be chafing under the Bushies. The heavy clues pointing to Tom Ridge seem to indicate he's the one; McCain's not a verbal gymnast, so when he says something he usually means it.

WHAT IF THEY COULD SHOOT YOU
AND NOT LEAVE A TRACE? THEY CAN.
http://www.nowpublic.com/world/zap-have-you-been-targeted-directed-energy-weapon-victims-organized-gang-stalking-say-its-happening-usa-1

Posted by: scrivener | August 15, 2008 2:56 PM | Report abuse

Obama picks Biden, McCain picks his nose. The GOP has no candidate taht isn't downright dangerous and/or a disgrace. All they is a bunch if money from wealthy scumbags, several hundred boiler roomer across the country (and some that just might have been outsourced to India) with paid bloggers, and lying peodophiles possing as "authors". Oh, and they have the human cockroaches over at Fox for the really brain dead....

Posted by: Observer | August 15, 2008 2:54 PM | Report abuse

I would whole-heartedly support a Biden or Richardson choice.

My guess on McCain is that he will choose someone from the business world -- not the world of politics. I think it will be designed as a surprise pick from *outside* the beltway. It's one of the only ways McCain can grasp at the change mantle again. It may also be the only way he will not be seen as 'reacting' to Obama's announcement.

By choosing an unknown, McCain can grab the press cycle -- and hold it.

Posted by: Julia Kelly | August 15, 2008 2:54 PM | Report abuse

Jack, you posted, "Biden? I cannot a more boring or uninspired pick." I disagree, Pawlenty would be "more boring" on either Obama's or McCain's ticket. It was suggested, by a former Republican Governor from Minnesota, that Pawlenty fits Obama's ticket better than McCain's. Of course, then there are the posters who have posted:
McCain = Pawlenty = yawn. Anyway, I'm from Minnesota and will vote for incumbent Senator Norm Coleman (R) because he truly is pro-life unlike our governor even when I will not vote for a McCain/Pawlenty ticket.

A brand new Rasmussen poll appears to be a poll you can actually have confidence in this election year, and it "found that a third of those polled in Minnesota say they're less likely to vote for McCain if Gov. Pawlenty is on the ticket.

Picking Minnesota's Republican Governor Tim Pawlenty as his running mate might cost McCain more votes in the state than he will gain. Thirty-four percent (34%) of Minnesota voters say they are less likely to vote for the GOP candidate if Pawlenty is the vice presidential nominee, while 28% say it makes them more likely to vote for McCain. Thirty-five percent (35%) say it will have no impact on how they vote.

Nearly a third of unaffiliated voters (32%), however, say putting Pawlenty on the GOP ticket makes them less likely to vote for it, while 22% say it makes them more likely to vote for McCain.

Only 11% say McCain is Very Likely to pick Pawlenty."

This is not surprising as on Super Tuesday, in a straw poll, Romney came in first, in Minnesota, followed by Huckabee with Pawlenty coming in third. However, McCain has a right to lose his bid for presidency, and who am I to stop him?

Posted by: Patricia Gould | August 15, 2008 2:52 PM | Report abuse

McCain actually *names* his number two??

Man, that's sick.

Posted by: Immature | August 15, 2008 2:50 PM | Report abuse

Chris,
As always, nice post; today I actually made it over to the fix from Justin Webb's blog on the BBC and something occured to me reading his post and yours together:

The pick will be Hillary Clinton.

Here's my angle, Justin's post yesterday talked about "Clinton's convention" and how she pressured Obama to take over. I think his assessment owes to the fact that he (and most of the media) have completely disregarded her as a candidate. Bill is out of the picture (on purpose). She is laying low (to avoid Hillary fatigue). There is still a large faction within the party that would now be excited to vote for her as veep (as I'm sure that Obama's excellent polling team has found out).

Anne Kornblut's report on how Obama and Clinton are coming out together and talking about this though I think is another case of Obama "hiding in plain sight" as he has shown a penchant for doing. Although, no one is noticing because they have ignored her chances. And your column cements my opinion of that as well.

I think that I would go out on a very long limb and say that the tea leaves are pointing to her and have been all along.

Posted by: CBusGuy | August 15, 2008 2:48 PM | Report abuse

I sincerely doubt it would ever happen, but I liked what Sam Stein over at Huffington Post was suggesting, that John Kerry could get the Veep.

Maybe I'm sentimental, but I'd like to see him get a second chance. A rematch in Kerry vs. GOP could be one heck of a story.

Posted by: Dangerman | August 15, 2008 2:47 PM | Report abuse

I think it's hard for anyone to try and say "Biden" and "boring" in the same sentence when it comes to a pick for VP.

It's like "alrighty...now bring em on!"

The civilized blue collar guy who became a professor...until... the time is right and say to Biden...(to steal from the movie "Stand By Me"")

"Chopper...sick ba11s!"

yeah it won't be boring.

Posted by: dl | August 15, 2008 2:46 PM | Report abuse

Has anyone read about the rumbles of war in Europe?

Obama will go with Wesley Clark.

Posted by: piktor | August 15, 2008 2:46 PM | Report abuse

CC, You have Jack Reed as number 4 on your list but how come he is under the radar for so long.

He is no body for media at this moment.
Would this make a big socker for american people?

Posted by: Anonymous | August 15, 2008 2:45 PM | Report abuse

any take on Richardson joining the VP night speakers lineup?

Posted by: will | August 15, 2008 2:44 PM | Report abuse

I'm thinking Obama's choice isn't listed on the line and McCain's is. If McCain announces first I think he will pick Pawlenty but if he waits till after Obama's choice is made it will be Lieberman.
Thus Lieberman would be McCain's reaction choice to counter Obama picking either Chuck Hagel or General Zinni as his Veep.

Posted by: charles laffiteau | August 15, 2008 2:44 PM | Report abuse

Leahy or Bob Graham of Florida for Obama, Judge Judy for McCain (she won't hesitate to whack his pee pee).

Posted by: angriestdogintheworld | August 15, 2008 2:44 PM | Report abuse

I live in Minnesota and hope that McCain picks Pawlenty because then McCain will guarantee his defeat by Obama.

Posted by: tr718 | August 15, 2008 2:40 PM | Report abuse

I would love to see Biden on the Demo ticket but leading it and not on the VP slot. A McCain-Ridge ticket would certainly be interesting and appealing but the social conservatives would hit the roof. Serves them right though.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 15, 2008 2:36 PM | Report abuse

Biden would clearly be the best for Obama! Until now I had felt he was unlikely to be chosen. Yes, with 36 years in the Senate he does not add to the "new" or "change" mantra. However, the way his choice would address the "inexperienced" charge against Obama is more important to Obama's being elected.

He is far superior to Bayh or Kaine or whomever else in ALL categories. He will do the best as a campaigner (by far)and brings an obvious presence and stature to the ticket that cannot be replicated. His "everyman" (blue collar, lunch bucket, straight-talking) appeal is just what Obama needs in the campaign; his knowledge, respect, confidence, and independence are just what Obama says he wants in his vice president.

His persona and strengths should help in Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Missouri, and Florida, in particular. (And his Senate seat is much more likely to remain in the Democrat column than Bays' would.)

Posted by: Byron | August 15, 2008 2:30 PM | Report abuse

I would place Rob Portman above Bobby Jindal on McCain's list.

However, I do hope McCain selects a pro-choice running mate, because I'd like to see an even deeper wedge between the Republican presidential nominee and the right-wing base of the party. Then just look at Dobson, Limbaugh, Hannity, Ingraham, and the other right-wing gasbags: their heads would explode, and that would be such fun to see.

Posted by: harlemboy | August 15, 2008 2:24 PM | Report abuse

Biden? I cannot a more boring or uninspired pick.

Posted by: Jack | August 15, 2008 2:23 PM | Report abuse

It would strike me as a bit strange for Sen. McCain to pick Sen. Lieberman as his running mate. As an independent, I'm all for non-partisanship and bi-partisanship, but to give a member of the other party (albeit, one outside the party's mainstream) such an important position and a decent shot at the Presidency through either succession or positioning for 2012/2016 strikes me as bad party strategy.

Posted by: sanchoquijote2000 | August 15, 2008 2:20 PM | Report abuse

Varnson

if obama picks Biden it is an admission that he understands the resource that Biden would be in the office down the hall.

It also shows that he has the judgement to pick the best expert on Russia and Pakistan (foreign policy in general) as your right hand person...

and the guy who has been praised by both sides of the aisle and the White house for being the one guy in congress that seems to be able to work this unworkable congress.

Obama needs the right hand guy who can assist on getting these "changes" passed.

What picking Biden shows is Obama wants the best team he can and that his ego is not too big to pick someone who may be perceived as smarter than him (or Mccain for that matter) on an issue.

Posted by: dl | August 15, 2008 2:17 PM | Report abuse

He would not have to resign his seat, the next congress convenes before the Veep is inaugrated; ergo there wont be the same 51 senate Dem majority. Also, the RI legislature can merely change the rules for appointing a senate vacancy and require a special election be held, with no appointment. This happened in MA in 2004 when Kerry was running and Romney was Gov. As in MA, the RI Dems have veto proof majorities.

Posted by: Re: Jack Reed | August 15, 2008 2:16 PM | Report abuse

Over at SoonerThought we've been saying Biden for months. Glad you caught up, Chris! Heh.

Posted by: SoonerThought.blogspot.com | August 15, 2008 2:14 PM | Report abuse

to steveboyington - Ha-ha, good one! Imagine that! Hagee doing a cartwheel.

Posted by: SallyUSA | August 15, 2008 2:13 PM | Report abuse

and spectator2

you are dead on...

expect that if McCain picks Pawlenty (which there is a good chance) you will see in the debates and ad nauseum the fact that he cut the states infrastructure budget to the detriment of the state...

and THEN the I-35 bridge collapsed.

That will hurt him bad... and where he is weak against Biden on Foreign Policy and getting things throguh the complicated waters of congress... he then also has to avoid talking about tax cuts and infrastructure...

sets him up to be a very quiet VP candidate who just talks about his Presidential caniddates war record and how old he is...

Posted by: dl | August 15, 2008 2:11 PM | Report abuse

No Hillary - that's how I like it. This is the time to crush her.

Posted by: No She Won't | August 15, 2008 2:10 PM | Report abuse

McCain - Lieberman, good pick. For Obama I'm thinking more about Brian Schweitzer, the Gov of Montana. I saw him on 60 min. a year or two ago. Progressive, has energy ideas, and is turning around a red state, with good jobs and and eye for the future. Biden's too old, been around the block; Kaine gives me the creeps; Sebelious would be a slap in the face to Hilary. Reeds not bad, but too short. (I know! It's crazy, but true; tall people have more advantages in life). Clark, Bradley, Richardson, good for administration team maybe. But Schweitzer, now that guy + Obama, we REALLY could change the world ... or at least make some necessary repairs to the damaged USA.

Posted by: SallyUSA | August 15, 2008 2:10 PM | Report abuse

If McCain wants to lose any support from his base, he'll select the junior Senator from Connecticut. It might be a bipartisan pick, but it won't win him the election.
If Obama picks Biden, won't that be an admission of his supposed lack of foreign policy credentials.

Posted by: Varnson | August 15, 2008 2:07 PM | Report abuse

My prediction for this morning:

1) Obama will pick Hagel

2) McCain will pick Lieberman

This will be a real classic match with no odds of favor to win the race.

Me, I will just watch from the side.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 15, 2008 2:06 PM | Report abuse

John Hagee would do a cartwheel if Joe Lieberman was selected.

Posted by: steveboyington | August 15, 2008 2:06 PM | Report abuse

Chris

your list is dead on.

though I might switch Lieberman and Ridge (an idea Chuck Todd has floated that if he was going to risk taking the step in that direction he would go all the way)

but I still agree Ridge first because of the PA strength and two vets with National Security credentials as we seem to be having issues popping up all over the world now...would be attractive instates like VA and CO as well...and Ohio.


and I am pretty sure Bayh is done at this point. The sponsorship of the war bill..."the pi$$ed off masses" (old time dems, left wingers, blogosphere and anti-war groups...all of whom are too important to Obama's energy...and the fact that the "boring thin" and the "Issues not seemingly to be important enough to fight for unless we are going to war" thing...

and a number of other issues...has rendered his chances slimmer.

as has been said forever...unless Biden goes running down the streets of Washington with his p*&^% in his hand...it's going to be Biden.

Posted by: dl | August 15, 2008 2:06 PM | Report abuse

I have posted this before, and would really like to see CC address it: the gov. of RI is a Republican. He would appoint a Republican to replace Jack Reed. Do you really see this happening when the Dems are trying to get a veto-proof majority?

Obama needs national security/foreign policy cred, or he is going to be eaten alive. I don't get the buzz for Sibelius or any of the other govs. I'm sure they're great people, but what are they bringing to the ticket?

To my mind, it has to be someone along the lines of Biden, Richardson, or Clark.

Posted by: Mme_Libn | August 15, 2008 2:05 PM | Report abuse

I like Biden as a fire-breathing politician. If he could maintain mouth control - he'd be a good choice.

I like the idea of Sebelius but . . .

If the objective is to 'Do no harm' - Obama is already sailing into the headwinds with people like my father-in-law, who will never vote Obama for every reason other than he's black.

Given that half of the public is below average intelligence - but they get to vote anyway. I reluctantly let Sebelius go . . . Since none of the others seems like they're Quayle caliber, I don't suppose it really matters.

Posted by: NoOneImportant | August 15, 2008 2:01 PM | Report abuse

I-35 Bridge is falling down, falling down
I-35 Bridge is falling down,
Tim Paw-lenty!

Posted by: Spectator2 | August 15, 2008 1:59 PM | Report abuse

"Found on the Huffington Post"

Today we have one more bureaucratic blunder to add to the list. The VA has banned voter registration at veterans' nursing homes and homeless shelters. The irony is almost too great. Disabled veterans, who have made such tremendous sacrifices in defense of democracy, are now being denied assistance in voting.

The VA is claiming that voter registration drives are partisan, and would interfere with the functioning of their facilities. But hundreds of nonpartisan organizations regularly participate in voter registration drives -everyone from the League of Women Voters to the Elks Club. Helping people vote is a civic duty, not a partisan activity.

And if voter registration drives interfere with an institution's functioning, someone should tell the Texas Hospital Association and the American Medical Student Association, both of whom run voter registration campaigns at hospitals and clinics. The "Rx: Vote Campaign," run by the National Physicians Alliance, argues:

"Without exercising the right to vote, patients and those who care for them lack the power to improve the health of their communities. As a result, patients' health, and the health of our democracy, suffer. The nation's community health centers, clinics, and hospitals have a unique ability and responsibility to empower patients to participate in the democratic process."
If doctors believe voter registration drives can and should be happening at their hospitals, why can't the VA accept voter registration at their facilities?

The VA doesn't have a leg to stand on morally or legally. But if the VA refuses to budge, Congress will have to act quickly to overrule the VA, before veterans start missing their states' voter registration deadlines.

It should not take an act of Congress for the VA to admit they made a mistake. But until they do, hospitalized veterans like Martin O'Nieal, "a 92-year-old man who lost a leg while fighting the Nazis in the mountains of Northern Italy," will have to struggle to exercise the very rights they helped defend on the field of battle.
====================================================================================
How can you help protect the voting rights of our veterans?

Keep an eye on IAVA.org.

In the meantime, make sure that you are registered to vote.

It only takes a second....and the payoff is Obama '08

Posted by: AlexP1 | August 15, 2008 1:56 PM | Report abuse

I've been saying Pawlenty and Biden for some time.

The reason Kaine may not have a speaking slot is that Obama may wants to give him the nominating speech.

Posted by: Paleo | August 15, 2008 1:55 PM | Report abuse

soulmetal - Bill Bradley was my dark horse pick a month or two ago. I see Obama picking a VP based on the Cheney (circa 2000) model - someone with Washington experience, but currently out of Washington. Bradley came to my mind first, but there are surely others who fit the mold.

Posted by: bsimon | August 15, 2008 1:52 PM | Report abuse

Clark will be out of the country during the convention. It was on Huffington Post the other day

Obama/Sebelius 08

Posted by: Stephen | August 15, 2008 1:51 PM | Report abuse

Pawlenty is a lock for McCain.

Kaine has to be on top of Obama's list because he has yet to receive an invitation to speak at the convention. Why wait so late to slot someone as important as Kaine?

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Posted by: matt | August 15, 2008 1:49 PM | Report abuse

I still can't understand why Bill Richardson is not the logical pick. Best resume of the bunch. Strong foreign policy credentials. Executive experience. Very popular in a southwestern state. HISPANIC! Jeez. What more can you ask for? I just don't get it.

Posted by: topper | August 15, 2008 1:42 PM | Report abuse

Wow, no Clinton

Posted by: DDAWD | August 15, 2008 1:41 PM | Report abuse

Why, through this entire process, has Bill Bradley not earned any VP consideration? He brings more to the table than anyone on this list. He would seem to be the perfect fit: distinguished himself both inside and outside the beltway, offends no particular constituency, early supporter of Obama.

Posted by: soulmetal | August 15, 2008 1:39 PM | Report abuse

What about Wes Clark? Any hope still out for him? I know he got pounced on for mentioning McCain's POW stuff, but he also proved his attack-dog mettle, no?

Posted by: johnnymcnugget | August 15, 2008 1:38 PM | Report abuse

Pretty good line. I'd put even money on The Fix being 1 for 2 with his top picks. Personally I still think Obama will pick someone mostly off the radar & include Reed in that category. McCain seems more likely to pick from the top 5 identified above. Huck's comments this week seem to indicate he's been long off the list.

Posted by: bsimon | August 15, 2008 1:36 PM | Report abuse

I swear, I will buy a bottle of Dom for every poster on this site if McCain would pluck Lieberman from the Senate and put him on the ticket. Oh man, it would be a Festivus miracle!

Posted by: SWB | August 15, 2008 1:34 PM | Report abuse

Anyone but Hillary for Dem VP!

Posted by: RealChoices | August 15, 2008 1:29 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company