Go West, Young Man!

I would give anything for it to be sweitzer. He would be really cool.

If he picks Schweitzer then I will dig into my savings account to give to this campaign!!

I just posted an updated map on the earlier thread.

However, one key difference in mine is that I routed the tour through St. Paul, MN, Kaine's birthplace, which then sends them south to Iowa via I-35.

If it's Kaine, and also because of the impending RNC wake, I mean convention in St. Paul, this would be my bet.

Ooh Lawdy! Looky looky. . . gonna be one of three governors? Who woulda thought, no foreign policy gravitas! Who woulda called a Washington outsider on a populist kick? Who indeed. . .

Sorry Cokie, Halperin, “The Dean” et al.

Try harder next time.

Love this betting game. So the reports about Indianapolis were a head fake?

Based on this itinerary I would have to consider Schweitzer seriously and Kaine. I would like to think McCaskill is a contender but it's hard to imagine giving up that senate seat. The "running against Washington" frame makes excellent sense and a good basis for the VP choice.

 

It is getting close to the 3 am moment here for me.

amk

..about how this looks for Sebelius. While the lack of stops in Ohio or Kansas aren't good signs, Kansas City, MO is right on the border and shares a large media market with northeastern Kansas, the most densely populated part of that state. And if what I've read is correct, Sebelius is quite well known in the KC metro area.

On the other hand, the stop in Montana on Wednesday night does seem like a Schweitzer pick isn't out of the question. I'd be quite happy with either.

Schweitzer!

This is look'n really, really good.

Cokie, how about we send you and your pundit, insider hubby, to the big island, that exotic locale.  Maybe you will jump into the volcano.

(Hey, a person that loaths the lamestream punditry can dream, right?)

Obama's bus tour will stop in these cities along the way to pick up the various VP candidates, with each in turn being spotlighted in their home towns among their base of supporters, and ONLY upon arrival in Denver will the campaign announce which one has been selected?

How does that sound for an attention-getting and enthusiasm-building plan?

It think it's looking like either Kaine, Schweitzer or Gore.

All more than acceptable choices.

Cranking out one insightful post after another.

After looking at the iternary I am prepared to go on a limb and say it is Schweitzer. Why would a democratic presidential nominee be in Billings, MT on the second-most important day of the convention? He could have gone to New Mexico if he was just looking to campaign with VP nominee in a state that is expected to be close this fall. I am expecting the text message Friday evening or Saturday noon just before the event in Springfiled. It is going to be great.

I think the fact that Obama has spent the last two days in Virginia, coupled with that travel map, is a good sign for Kaine being the pick. Kaine also was a surrogate this morning hitting McCain with the Obama camp's message of the day focusing on McCain being out of touch on the economy. Also, the benefit of Kaine having run in, and won, a fairly brutal campaign recently is a benefit that Bayh and Biden don't bring along. Kaine knows what he'll be up against with constant attacks on Obama and he'll be ready to refute them. Kaine's media expectations will also be fairly low, since he doesn't have the high profile or the bombastic style of others, which could help in media's assessment of his convention speech and the VP debate.

A biased one beacuse I really, really want it to be Sebelius but here's my take.

http://thepage.time.com/2008/08/21/obama-headed-to-wisconsin-iowa-mis...

Springfield Saturday, Eau Claire, Wisconsin Sunday, the Quad Cities
area in Iowa Monday, Kansas City, Missouri Tuesday and Billings,
Montana Wednesday.

Is it just me or does that mean it is not going to be Bayh?

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&ll=37.160317,-105....

That's a map of the trip. If your going to pick Bayh wouldn't you stop in Indiana or at least somewhere close to Indiana?

So that leaves us with Kaine and Biden who are not remotely in the area (which could make them seem likely and pick the pick more of a surprise) or Sebelius.

Draw a line from the start to the finish and it runs through Kansas, the closest stop to a VP's home is Kansas (Kansas City), it's being billed as focusing on economic issues and is in places where people care about economic issues, Sebelius is currently slotted to speak on economic issues and that's her best area. Sebelius has been campaigning in similar areas for Obama recently, she was in Michigan to kick off women for Obama (women outreach tryout?) and is in Iowa today hitting McCain on houses (attack dog tryout?).

I'm probably way over reading this. But I think it might be Sebelius. And I'm really, really hoping that. So right now I predict Sebelius will get the call for being VP on Friday with Kaine and Biden being the next most likely.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080821/ap_on_el_pr/veepstakes

He says it's someone who is independent, prepared to be president, and would help him strengthen the economy.  He will appear with the person in Illinois on Saturday.  (feel free to not approve this comment if someone already posted the same link)

Been here since March. Still here with the fingers crossed.  Liking that stop in Billings, though I wish they'd put in an appearance (O and whomever it is) somewhere in South Dakota since they are passing through.

And Armchairmen comment, I know but if half of politics is just showing up, I would think South Dakotans (and the folks in Omaha, for that matter) would appreciate the attention.

i sent an e-mail to my buddy (and fellow recent Fieldhand) that read, in the subject line only and in it's entirety:

"Dude, Obama is on fire today, and so is Al! Wheee, Fieldhands!"

He's got to hit the places where he needs a campaign presence and where he can spend his time and get some return on it. Whether his VP is Clinton or Kaine or John Q. Suit, his campaign priorities are going to be pretty much the same. Wisconsin, Iowa, Missouri, Montana...really don't have anything to do with any of the "short list" names (and I will eat my shoe if Schweitzer is the pick), they really more reflect campaign strategy, the same strategy we've seen in the past several months. This could easily be a July itinerary, it's pretty unremarkable.

Bill "The CW" Schneider and Wolfman Blitzer are touting Hillary as VP even as they show numbers that indicate her base is moving to Obama more than McCain.

The onscreen chyron said "VP Buzz for Clinton."

Umm, that buzz you hear are the flies gathering around the corpse.

It is the VP rollout tour so there has to be some symbolic value and a narrative. And the narrative would be perfect if it is Schweitzer and the tour begins in Springfield and ends in Billings, MT and then they both head to Denver.

I think you're misreading what this map is. It's not the actual road tour of Obama, it's one stop a day plugged into Google Maps. In other words, it's the likely late night bus driver route. It says nothing about other stops. A visit to Minneapolis during the day on Sunday before an event in Eau Claire at night is possible. A visit to Topeka or El Dorado on Tuesday is possible.

If Schweitzer has to leave Montana for the VP spot, who takes over? Isn't it a Republican?

Isn't that a loss for the Dems?

We won't have to shoot you, Al.  Can't imagine Linda Daschle passing the vetting for spouse of VP - too many lobbyist connections. Expect to see Daschle as COS.

Kaine.  Tho, like Christi, I'd JUMP for JOY with Gore.

I think this tells us NOTHING about who the VP is.   It's just a good battleground route to Denver.

Agree most with Ben (itinerary unrelated to VP choice).

Also, didn't Webb go all populist-y in his senate race?

since it's not, I just thought I'd throw something my husband said into the pot. I'd mentioned the recent discussions here to him and when I said a number of folks were floating Gore's name (someone he really likes) I was surprised by his immediate 'no way' response. His take was that too many people would be upset that Gore wasn't at the top of the ticket that it would undermine Obama.

Personally I'd be thrilled with Gore, Sebilius, or Schweitzer and I'm happy enough with Kaine. Okay truth be told I trust Obama's judgement in this that whoever he picks (unless it is an Iraq war supporter - that I do have a problem with) will be fine with me. LOL of course what I think about this means ziltch but hey it matters to me ;-).

No worries for SD.  The great thing about a bus tour is you can make as many whistle-stops along the way as the schedule will accommodate, so I doubt Obama would pass through SD without disembarking at least once.

I will reiterate:  Obama has cultivated and owned an image of being a DC outsider.  In my view he has totally head-faked the corporate pundit class.

Schweitzer was decided on as a very, very, likely VP in May, when O-man had the nomination all but wrapped up.

Obama's campaign is playing chess.

Electing a non-white, half-African male for the first time in US history is a unique, outside-the-box, situation.  Why wouldn't Obama choose as unlikely a running mate?

You can bet that Schweitzer has been amply vetted--and he will bring a degree of authenticity (yes, cynics, the concept is always operative, everywhere) and down-homeness, regular-folkness to the campaign.   And he ought to bring his dog to the convention floor.

Where Obama causes pause in people because he is very honed and calculating (intellectual)--Schweitzer will appeal to folks more amendable to a humble, firm, and frank mild populist from the Western heartland.

All this is just my hunch--but I don't think that another stop in Billings is just part of regular campaigning.  The route that Obama has chosen to Denver has incredible significance--otherwise he might just as well be in Ohio or Florida.

 

 

I will have died and gone you know where.

Obama/Schweitzer '08

A Ticket for the 21st Century

I think team Obama knows that Daschle wouldn't fire up the base. If you're going for the three point shot, and you really want to WOW the crowd, you gotta go with someone like Schweitzer or GORE. At this point and with how long this is going on, I have to believe it will be better than Daschle. This is team Obama we're talking about after all. There's only one man who likes to mess with the media more than Obama-you guessed it, Gore. And, if it is Gore, this has likely been orchestrated for far longer than any of us, except those of us who read both Obama and Gore's books at the same time and saw the same messages throughout-ever expected. I don't know, it was once totally unlikely but seems an interesting possibility now. Others are thinking Bloomberg-however I just read that Bloomberg is trying to extend term limits to stay Governor of NY for another term. This was according to the NY post today. I'm reluctant to believe that Obama would release his schedule and make it this easy for us to figure it out when we have been in suspense for so long....Hmmmm. No wonder he won the primaries! :)

Latest news from Barack is he has picked the person but won't say when he'll tell us or if he's told the VP. He wanted someone who would help him with the economy. I'm still holding out hope that Gore will get off the sidelines and get in this thing! If not, and as I said before, Schweitzer would be great.

and picking up everybody on the way to Denver. It's just a carpool kinda thing.

This has been fun, I can hardly wait to see who it is.

"Three point shot! Three point shot!"

If it was Schweitzer, why would Obama go to Billings on the day the VP is speaking in Denver? Seems like cutting it a bit close. Just sayin'. But I hope so.

Also, here's audio of the Obama confirmation:

http://blogs.usatoday.com/onpolitics/2008/08/obama-says-hes.html

Man, I hope he blows everyone's socks off with this...

Having been away for a while, where, when, and how has Schweitzer appeared in the national media as a strong surrogate for Obama?  Kaine obviously has been busy in this role for more than the last month. Sebelius likewise, though less loudly.  Somehow I have missed Schweitzer's public auditions. Maybe that's because he has had it in the bag for a long while. Or, maybe I have just missed him. Any helpful links to the Montana governor as surrogate since July 4 would be really helpful.

 

The only question is whether he will say Brian Schweitzer and travel WITH Schweitzer back to Billings and on to Denver or wait until Tuesday or even Wednesday to announce which would make sense as Al pointed out August 19.

I am updating a Schweitzer-focused page here:

http://stephencrosehome.blogspot.com

I do not call this a three pointer. It is a SLAM DUNK. Arrogance! You know it! And Al has the reasons cold.

 

 

 

 

 

Just a quick correction - Bloomberg is mayor of NYC, not the state Gov. ;-) I grew up upstate and many folks there get sensitive about the frequent misperception of NYC as the entire state.

If its Gore-I will be grinning from ear-to-ear. Of course, I think that there is a  99.9% chance that isn't, but I have a little while to hope.

 

Four themes seem to present in Obama's "what I want in a VP" talking points.

1. Someone who is qualified to be President, right now.

2. An independent voice; and perhaps someone who does not agree with Obama on every issue. Perhaps someone who does not come from the same ideological mileu as Obama.

3. An economic populist, someone who is strong on the economy.

4. Someone whom he trusts

Who fits into all four points-I'm not sure.

I'm guessing Sebelius will be his choice.

Brendan,

Other people on this board are far more knowledgable about Schweitzer than I am, but I think that Obama & Biden have spent 4th of July together.

Other than that, I'm not aware of any stumping Brian has done. Which IMHO makes his choice as VP less likely.

 

 

Whooops-sorry. Point is, don't think it will be him.

These VP picks rarely play out according to conventional wisdom and I think Obama's team has been having fun with the media on this. I recently suggested that Obama was going to make a surprise pick and made my own argument for Schweitzer, so I'd love it if that were the case.

http://rielworld.com/2008/08/19/obama-veepstakes-surprise/

By the way, Al, I love your reporting and your fresh takes on the election. It's a pleasure to follow your blog. 

Let's wait and see before making any wild-a$$ed guesses.  Let's take a deep breath and consider all of the evidence (aren't we supposed to be the purveyors of reason?)

• I can't recall one instance Schweitzer (in stark comparison to the other VP candidates) has served as a national surrogate for Obama.
• Schweitzer had no formal role in the Obama campaign at all, and didn't endorse until after Montana had voted (rather late in the primary cycle).  Compare this to Kaine and Sebelius. 
  
• At one point (in 2007, I believe), Schweitzer publicly stated that he was considering voting for (yikes) Mitt Romney.
• The two apparently barely appeared together at the Fourth of July event in Billings.
• Schweitzer recently went off message a bit when he let it slip that gun owners wouldn't love either major party candidate.
• Schweitzer publicly took Obama's policies to task during the primaries.
• Schweitzer seems to be the kind of guy who loves to ham it up for the cameras (is that a quality Obama would value?). 
  
• Schweitzer has repeatedly indicated his strong disdain for Washington D.C.  Is he really all that likely to give up his current reelection campaign for Montana governor (where he is very popular) in order to move to an environment he despises?

I would love for Obama to tap Schweitzer.  But those of you claiming it is a done deal are a little loopy.  The odds have to be less than 1 in 10.  If it happens, it would be a tremendous and improbable darkhorse pick.

As long as Obama doesn't tap another U.S. Senator, we should all breathe a huge sigh of relief.

The geography: I'm not sure if we can read the road-map to be an indication of who the VP is. For one thing, as others have pointed out earlier-a trip from Springfield to Denver will go through those states. Secondly why would the Obama campaign tip off everyone as to who the VP nominee is through the map? Already people are guessing Seibelius, Kaine, Schweitzer based on the map.

The date/time: I've seen two conflicting theory for the date of delievery, if it is on a Friday. One: It is a BIG name pick-(go gore!) a pick that would dominate the weekend headlines. Or two: the Obama campaign doesn't want a lot of talking heads discussing the VP, before Obama and the VP do their apperance in Springfield.

My dark horse bet is Sebelius, but if its Biden I'd be very satistified and if the choice is Gore-well the O-team deserves a gold medal for pulling one over on everyone.

 

Earlier I said that Biden & Obama spent the 4th together-meant Schweitzer & Obama.

No, if Schweitzer was decided upon in May, as I believe, then it would have spoiled everything to have him become an attack dog these past two months.

O-man gives the attentive (and non-brainwashed) clues:

"I want somebody who's independent, somebody who can push against my preconceived notions and challenge me so we have got a robust debate in the White House."

Note the emphasis on 'independent'. This would characterize the aura that surrounds a Western Democrat more than Kain or Sebelius--or, at least I am inclined to think so. Not saying that Sebelius wouldn't be an excellent choice--but I am just say'n that choosing her would be riskier than a white male given the novelty of having a bi-racial candidate as the Democrat contender. Sad but true. Sebelius is more photogenic than Schweitzer--and with her the ticket could look too smooth.

One of O-man's problems is that, for many, he looks too slick and too smooth. Schweitzer will help balance this out some.

If Schweitzer can help mitigate some of the qualms on the part of white folk, then this is a masterful stroke on the part of Obama. Schweitzer will bring 'balance' by challenging O-man's preconcieved ideas (becoming a defacto surrogate for white males that the multicultural Obama might not have the necessary sensitivities with respect to the 'tone' of policy/decisions)

Indeed, if it is not Schweitzer than I will eat my shoe.

As I am human, however, I do have the propensity to look for information that confirms my predispositions and biases.

If it IS Gore--than the O-man faked me out, he would have bested me and others here, and I will have absolutely NO problem with that. Gore has redeemed himself in my eyes for some of the crap that happened under Clinton.

An Obama/Gore ticket would have the 'slighted man gets revenge' meme happening. This would be fun also.

 

 

The more I reread Obama's description of his VP choice, the more I'm leaning to a certain former primary frontrunner.

"I want somebody who has integrity, who’s in politics for the right reasons, I want somebody who is independent."  << This pretty much rules out Clinton, Biden, Bayh >>

"Somebody who is able to say to me, ‘You know what, Mr. President, I think you’re wrong on this and here’s why,’ and who will help me think through major issues and consult with me, would be a key advisor."

"I want somebody who is capable of being president and who I would trust to be president. That’s the first criteria for VP." << Definitely rules out Hillary >>

"And the final thing is, I want a vice-president who shares with me a passion to make the lives of the American people better than they are right now."            << Sounds like a certain former Catamount governor >>

"I want someone who is not in it just because they want to have their name up in lights or end up being president. I want somebody who is mad right now that people are losing their jobs. And is mad right now that people have seen their incomes decline, and wants to rebuild the middle class in this country. That’s the kind of person that I want; somebody who in their gut knows where they came from and believes that we have to grow this country from the bottom up."

<< Boom.  That sounds a lot like a former DNC chairman. >>

Anybody know what Howard Dean is trading for on Intrade?

I have seen to date:

 

Please spread around, folks.

"somebody who in their gut knows where they came from"

Dean grew up with a wealthy family and went to private schools..It doesn't fit with that theme

It also describes Jim Webb from Virginia.

"I want somebody who is independent." 

Check. Guy switched parties.

"Somebody who is able to say to me, ‘You know what, Mr. President, I think you’re wrong on this and here’s why,’ and who will help me think through major issues and consult with me, would be a key advisor."

Webb's notoriously blunt and outspoken. Doesn't pull punches. As for being a key advisor, he's knowledgable with experience in government (former Navy Secretary).

"I want somebody who is capable of being president and who I would trust to be president. That’s the first criteria for VP."

Again, Webb was the civilian leader of a significant department within the Department of Defense.

"And the final thing is, I want a vice-president who shares with me a passion to make the lives of the American people better than they are right now."    

The Scots-Irish Webb exudes passion (some would say too much), particularly on the issue of the economy and the growing disparity between the haves and have-nots. Al, I disagree with you about him being a populist. Webb actually won in Virginia with a populist, anti-Iraq war message. Check out this op-ed from '06:

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110009246

"I want somebody who is mad right now that people are losing their jobs. And is mad right now that people have seen their incomes decline, and wants to rebuild the middle class in this country. That’s the kind of person that I want; somebody who in their gut knows where they came from and believes that we have to grow this country from the bottom up."

Anyone who's seen Webb's memorable exchange with Lindsay Graham on Press The Meat ("Lindsay's having a bad week. . .") recognizes that the guy has a short fuse, but in a totally compelling way.

Anyway, I doubt it'll be Webb - for a variety of reasons- but he would make this race a lot more interesting.

 

So McCain and a 527 group are out with ads today after McCain got pummeled on not knowing how many homes he owns. This indicates that McCain is running scared. Both ads deserve responses pronto and are both pathetic attacks. Obama wasn't implicated in anything either Rezko or Ayers did and that should be easy to say.

Reading that description, I thought of Webb too-especially on the economic populism message.

Here is an interesting quote from a supposed insider on the Obama VP selection:

The VP choice was a difficult one for Obama, a source close to the Illinois senator tells CNN's Gloria Borger.

Specifically Obama was "very hung up on the experience versus change,” the source said, and how his message of change may conflict with a longtime Washington insider.

The source doesn't know who Obama ultimately chose, but confirms Sens. Joe Biden and Evan Bayh, along with Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine are all in the running.

 

in my opinion. Me thinks Dean's career in national electoral politics was over after his scream on the night he lost Iowa in 2004. The media was relentless and finished him off. I like Dean and he is doing a great job to build the party but it is tough to comeback after a hit like that.

The campaign stops have very little to do with the selection, from my perspective.

They're not going to give anything away via the scheduling.

Schweitzer people are setting themselves up for disappointment (shades of Plame-Fitzgerald here). It's getting to the point where a totally acceptable choice in Kaine is going to seem like a huge letdown.

Prospect of Schweitzer getting the nod is a enormously appealing, but it's more of a half court shot than a three-pointer.

Anyone not named Bayh or Nunn is a solid enough choice in my book.

Obama gave this hint about his VP choice today:

 

"I want somebody who's independent, somebody who can push against my preconceived notions and challenge me so we have got a robust debate in the White House."

 

This doesn't sound like Sebilius or Kaine. They see eye to eye on too many issues. So they don't satisfy Obama's need for someone to challenge him on his ideas.

It looks like it'll be somebody who (a) either has a very strong & bold personality or (b) someone who differs quite a bit w/ Barack on matters of policy-- so a very moderate/conservative Democrat.

 

Halperin has a picture of Richard Lugar on The Page:

http://thepage.time.com/

and seems to be implying Lugar could be Obama's VP pick.

Huh?

has had everyone on the shortlist up at some point this week.  The other day he swore it was Biden. 

I took his taking himself out of the running to be a sign that the Obama campaign was allowing him to bow out gracefully because he was not going to be tapped.

Given the Obama campaign's history of drumming up anticipation for so-called huge endorsements, it is not beyond the realm of possiblity that we will be let down by his VP pick.  Anybody here remember the Joe Andrew fiasco?  Some on this board were trying to convince us that he actually was a huge get.

Could the Obama campaign be so silly to fire up its base with the text message gambit, play up the anticipation to a fever pitch and then roll out a dud like Bayh, Dodd or Kaine (no offense intended because he seems like a nice guy)?   I don't think so, but we'll see.

I know a lot of people, myself included, are wondering if the long wait signifies a "big name" VP. I know I hoped that it would be someone that could unify the base, but attract independents & moderate republicans; could offer experience and seen as a viable President; but also reinforce Obama's message of change.

Out of the top three candidates, none of them have all of those qualities, IMO.

I think that no matter who is choice is, the decision was a difficult one. As the CNN story from a suposed insider said, Obama was very torn between an experience v. change candidate. And how a D.C. insider could conflict with his message of change. Now, right there that leads me to believe that decided against Biden. On the otherhand, maybe he decided that the sum of Biden's strenghts would be able to offset any weaknesses. But, Biden has not campaigned with Obama, and with the talk of "no ego" I would doubt that the choice would be Biden.

As for Tim Kaine, Obama clearly trusts him and likes him-they work well together. But, I'm not sure if right now Kaine would be seen as someone who is ready to be President.

Evan Bayh, offers legislative & executive experience; but the fact that he was on the commitee to authorize the war is problematic. After all, how can Obama go after McCain's judgment if his VP also shared the same judgment. I suppose he could say that Bayh now realizes the fallacy with the war and has adjust his thinking, but still...

 

My guess is that he'll pick either Bayh or Kaine.

I guess what I'm trying to say in this long rambling post is 1. Not to expect a surprise. 2. This was probably a really difficult choice for Obama; and while I certainly have my own prefernces I'm going respect whatever decision Obama makes.

Please for all you folks who want Al Gore to be VP please remember there are still ALOT of Obama supporters who are not fans of Al Gore and didn't vote for him in 2000 (nor Bush for that matter).

I wouldn't be happy with Gore as VP.  I'm happy with Gore being where he is now and it seems to be where Gore is happiest too.

Please when you all post remember that not everyone who is an Obama supporter is a Democrat.  Some of us are Independents too and don't support nor like the Washington Democratic Insiders.....

No Gore. Indy's like Kaine, Sebelius, and Schweitzer!

@ Vik

Are you angling for armchair general award today? If you have such good political judgment, why aren't you on the Team Obama payroll.

Frankly Joe Andrew was a darn good get as a former DNC chairman. And And at least Kaine and Dodd would be pretty good gets in my view. But who he chooses and the judgment Obama has, puts any stones thrown from the peanut section as pretty pathetic.

Vik - Really, you're getting quite over the top. First of all, it's not your decision, and it's not mine, who somebody else that earned the nomination chooses to have to spend the next four or eight years checking his pulse every day. 

You bring up former DNC chairman Joe Andrew's switch from Clinton to Obama before the primary in his home state of Indiana, and your opinion that it wasn't a big enough deal. Well, look at the results: Obama was down by six and more points in the polls in Indiana, Operation Chaos was advancing to help Clinton, and it ended up being a long night and a very tight contest. Maybe you don't think Andrew was as big a "celebrity" as the build-up to his switch deserved: but I'll bet you a lot of Hoosiers did.

We all have choices we'd prefer, and others we'd prefer not. The only thing any of us have in common though is we have preferences: not which ones, upon which we've got commenters here for or against every single possible choice. I've written very positively about Kaine. You've written derisively about him. But I don't really care and nor should you. But, really, who the hell do you think you are to declare which possibility is a "dud" and which is not? (I'm certain that among your favorites, there are choices that I wouldn't like, and vice versa. So what? Not our decision!)

You're engaging in a kind of preemptive Chicken Little-ism, even before the fact! There are places online where your sad sack routine will be welcomed with open arms. But here it's not going to make you any allies, friends or change the outcome of the events you comment about anyway. So why the distasteful negativity?

Perhaps, you didn't read or understand my post fully.  I'm not really interested in a name-calling contest, and would prefer to conduct an argument on the merits.  I stand by my points, none of which struck me as particularly trollish or armchairish:

1.  In relation to all of the hype and the lead-up that preceded it, the announcement of Joe Andrew's endorsement was a big letdown.  So, I would contend that was an instance where the Obama camp overplayed its hand.  And, yes, they deserve responsibility (along with those of us who are really-exciteable about this political stuff).

2.  While I don't think it is the case (something I made pretty clear in my post and not exactly hinted at by the phrase "I don't think so, but we'll see"), it is conceivable that Obama's VP choice will be a disappointment.  There are many here who have made the exact same point.

3.  Several of the most oft-named picks (Biden, Bayh, Clinton, Kaine) would be disappointments to many for reasons fully enumerated on this thread and others.  That's just a cold, hard reality.  Most folks aren't going to change their vote, but it may dampen their enthusiasm.  As an Indian-American, I'm not going to contribute any more to the campaign if Biden is the VP because I consider him to be, at worst, a racist and, at best, an insensitive lout.

If you felt slighted by my remarks, you could have taken a breath and pointed that out to me a little more respectfully.  I would have been much more receptive to the idea of making amends for any unintended offense.  But, to be perfectly honest with you, the tone of your post was rather off-putting.

I'm sorry, but I disagree.

1.  Obama's right to pick his own VP is completely irrelevant to this discussion because it is a given.  It stands to reason, though, that the Obama camp cares about the perception of that VP pick among its current and future supporters.

2.  I think it a stretch to attribute Obama's closing of the gap in the Indiana primary to Joe Andrew, particularly when there were so many other factors in play including demographics, proximity to the Chicago media market, proximity to Obama's home base of volunteers and the associated impact on its GOTV.  Finally, there are many states where Obama outperformed his polling.  That could very well be a reflection on the quality of the polling.

3.  I have not written derisively of Kaine, other than to suggest that he's little dull (as have many others here).  I don't consider that derisive.  You may or may not have access to your post archives, but I was one of the first to suggest him as a potential VP choice way back when were still in the primaries. I have no reason to believe that he's not an honorable man.

4.  I am not declaring anything.  I am merely expressing an opinion, just as others have here.

5.  I am not trying to portray a pre-emptive Chicken Littleism, other than to say that there exists the possibility that Obama won't pick the guy or gal many of us want.  I don't consider this to be excessively negative or especially controversial.  Ironically, I thought I made pretty clear in my post that I actually don't think that Obama will make an unpopular pick.

6.  I have been trying to make the point that we should be realistic in how we assess current events.  I don't agree that it was a "sad sack" routine.

7. I don't think the personal shots in your post advance the argument or the discussion.  I think it actually does the opposite particularly when you make it hard for the person you are ripping into to hear you.  I'm betting that you may have heard that feedback before.

Vik - You realize of course that no matter who the VP nominee is, somebody will say "I'm never giving another dollar to Obama ever again!" And nobody else will care, even if that's you.

What I read in this comments section daily is that people come here because it's largely free of those kinds of tantrums (and the exaggerations over what you consider to be the over-hyping of an endorsement last spring by categorizing it as a "fiasco." It wasn't any such thing. You might not think it helped as much as others did, but you have zero evidence that it hurt.)

When people behave like that on any blog, I consider it a form of soiling the sheets. We've been lucky to be one of the most free places of that mess here. And from time to time some otherwise constructive commenter wakes up on the wrong side of the bed and wants to inflict his misery on everyone else. Well, I'm the ref, and I'm throwing down the penalty flag. Take that kind of thing elsewhere!

Al,

I think you are misunderstanding the point I was trying to make.  I was saying that certain VP choices could dampen the enthusiasm of Obama supporters.  The Biden point was merely an illustrative example.  I was not trying to "throw a tantrum."

 

I don't think the Obama campaign is doing the text message thing because they know for sure the pick is going to excite the base. Their two main reasons, IMO, are:

1) Get as many phone numbers and emails as possible for GOTV and fund raising. The VP announcement is an occasion where they can get a ton of new numbers easily.

2) They want to show the 2 milllion plus donors (I would imagine a major chunk of those who have signed up for the text are from these 2 million plus donors) that their support is appreciated by announcing the choice to them first rather than the media.

Even if they think that the choice is a dud, they would still do this text thing, I think. The two things are not related.

<i>Halperin has had everyone on the shortlist up at some point this week. </i>

It's like Battlestar Galactica, where at some point you have suspected everyone of being a cylon. So when each cylon is revealed, all of fandom can cry "I knew it!" The chance that Obama has a veep pick who hasn't crossed anyone's mind this week is minimal.

Alluding to timing, I'm sure they're letting the homes story play out. But I can't imagine that really lasting--all 3 networks played it tonight, so they won't play it again tomorrow night. Best that we go onto discussion of the veep pick (and the meaning, in light of that, of Biden's bagels) with "I'll have my staff get back to you on that" the last anyone remembers from John McCain. So, given we're through the evening news, I really hope for a veep rollout tomorrow, denying the McCain camp a chance to change the subject. (Can they change the subject to a convention they're hoping no one notices? While Republican senators dive for cover?)

Mad B.

I completely agree with you on the text-messaging, I don't think that it has anything to do with who the choice is or whether the choice will galvanize the base.

As you noted, the text-messaging is a great tool for getting accurate phone numbers of potential supporters for GOTV. Also, the Obama campaign have been ahead of the curve with regards to communication & organization-the text messaging is simply in-line with what they have been doing in the past.

In other words, I strongly suspect the choice will be either Biden, Bayh or Kaine.

Witness what years of dodging black ops agents, South American death squads, and futuristic cyborgs can do to a man.

Al, I understand you want to develop good soldiers and maintain morale, but don't you think you're being a tad rough, paesano?

I agree that the site should remain uniquely free of excessive negativity, but you don't want that to come at the expense of diversity of thought and opinion.

 

(disclaimer: don't know Vik's history, so I could be talking out of my ass here)

From Halperin:

Obama tells TIME he wants someone who is “not about ego, self-aggrandizement, getting their name in the press” and tells CBS News he wants someone he would “feel comfortable with.”

You can cross Biden off your lists. . .

Might also disqualify Schweitzer, though he's far from being a camera whore.

Unfortunately, doesn't really give us any hints as to who he would pick out of a group of Kaine, Bayh, Sebelius, Jack Reed, etc.

Andrea Mitchell reported tonight that there is lots of activity at the Biden household. Family members gathering. Showed footage of cars arriving. All family members. Clearing dead tree stumps this past week. Biden made several trips to the bank today. Said it looked as if he were making preparations to be out of town for 60 days. Also, Biden now sneaking out the back door to avoid the press.

Said the Bayh and Kaine households, by comparison, were completely quiet. Nothing unusual.

While Biden may be gaffe-prone, he can be an hysterically funny man in private and is direct. Obama gets along with him. Maybe, if he chooses Biden, that's what Obama needs. Someone who will smoke a cigar with him late into the night in the room off the Oval Office where they can crack jokes and let their hair down.

I didn't know that Biden's wife and young daughter were killed in a car accident after Biden won his Senate seat at age 29, but before he was sworn in. His two sons were critically injured. They were in the hospital room with him when he was sworn in. Biden has gone home to those two boys every night since. Of course, one just left for Iraq. But Biden never got a place in DC and made sure he made it home "every night for 30 years" as it was put, in a reference to his reliability.

Let me try to come at this another way, taking extra care in choosing my words (I probably shouldn't have used the word "fiasco" in describing the Joe Andrew rollout when I meant "bit of a letdown").

I think the stakes are much higher at this very point.  By design and by fate, the VP rollout has become a raging inferno of cross-media attention, speculation, pontification and discussion.  Setting aside who may represent an exciting or a dull VP choice, if you were an Obama strategist, would you wait until this point to unveil someone who might be seen as a mainstream or underwhelming pick?

Isn't there a risk that the "underwhelming" or "mainstream" media narrative will dominate the airwaves at the very point when the most attention will be focused on your campaign, and cast a little bit of a pall over the convention?  Given that fact, why wait until now to announce the VP when you could have done it earlier?

I know that most campaigns announce the VP in the days leading up to the convention.  But this isn't most years (particularly because the Olympics pushed the conventions back a little bit).  And every little move of this campaign has already drawn unprecedented attention.

Doesn't it seem like Obama and his team are trying to build attention to a crescendo?  They have stoked the nation's attention masterfully.

The bases are loaded.  The fans are all on their feet.  Now they just need to hit the snot out of the ball.

 

Anyways despite the title of this article, there is a little blurb in the article that makes me suspect that Obama has chosen Kaine:

However, Obama did not reveal his choice to Kaine even after they met Thursday, according to two people close to the Virginia governor. They spoke on a condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly

According to MSNBC, Obama is not planning on telling the candidate he's been chosen until just a few minutes before the text-message goes out. The fact that Kaine has not been informed leads me to believe that he might get picked.

Secondly, according to Countdown, one of the "runner-ups" was told that he wasn't it and who the nominee.

So it looks like Obama has informed at least one of the other candidates that he won't be the nominee. The fact that Obama hasn't spoken to Kaine leads me to believe that he might very well be the pick.

The VP text campaign is a dry run for the Nov election in early voting and single-day voting states. They'll be able to ask the 212 area code person 'Where are you now?' and find out that someone is living at Duke Univ and that will shape subsequent msgs.

A lot of work but I'll bet they collected those cell phone numbers in the best CRM database going, and can massage the data to match precincts. 

For months I was getting emails to go to house parties in another state and volunteer in towns there and donate there...because my credit card address is located in that state. I also get them for where I live because I donated via PayPal.

HOWEVER. Ever since I sent in my cellphone no. for the VP  text message, guess what stopped? The 'other state'  appeals. AND. Now, I still get two emails because of the two email addresses, but they are both geared to where I live, where the cellphone is.

The micro-targeting and data building on each donor/activist/voter seems to be way advanced.

I just saw that at the Denver stadium event, people are receiving assigned seats with people from their same region: that will be useful to them for those hours they're making cell phone calls to register voters. It suggests strongly that people will be calling people from their own towns/cities/regions and saying "Hi, I'm here at the stadium with Barack! Look for us on TV tonight! And we want to sign you up to vote!"

The level of precision is impressive. And unprecedented.

a good prank is to call your political friends up at 5 am and tell them Obama picked Walter Mondale

 

I get the feeling someone will be sitting by her phone at 3am tonight in the pantsuit she picked out for the press conference..

I want to get Vik's back in part. I think there was some interesting tea leaf reading there that was lost in some poorly chosen wording. I think Andrews was a big rollout, but it was largely a big rollout for insiders and locals when a lot of us were expecting a big rollout for a national audience. I don't think that that is what's going to happen here. I may be wrong, but I think it's more along the lines of Richardson and Edwards endorsing.

To me, the magnitude of the hype involved with waiting until so close to the convention means that the Obama campaigns either plans to 1.) make for big theater with a high name recognition pick (Clinton, another presidential candidate, Gore, Kerry, or a Republican/Independent) or 2.) make voters scratch their heads, hit google and wikipedia, and like what they see. I tend to think a long-term Obama supporting three point shot (Sebelius or Kaine) or a more boring free throw (Bayh) would have been rolled out earlier this week. Perhaps the housing gaffe delayed it. Schweitzer really fits the bill for option 2, but there may be other possibilities.

Biden acts to me like someone who got offered a cabinet position (something he's always claimed to prefer) and volunteered to participate in the head fake. Kaine seems like the Dem answer to Bobby Jindal, the future of the party whose stock the candidate is choosing to help raise. Unless the housing bit got in the way, I think he would have been rolled out today. The floating of Bayh was done to see if the Clintonites got excited (they didn't) and the netroots would balk (they did). Sebelius would be exciting to me, but the tea leaves just don't seem to be going that way.

I too would like a three pointer, but I understand if he shoots inside. I do hope Obama doesn't pick Dick Cheney. Otherwise I'm behind his choice.

Obama won it BIG in the primary, and drew a huge crowd in very cold weather.

Once upon a time a bluecollar town, now a pretty big campus and tech.

Not Feingold's home, but he's always runs well there. The adjacent rural counties showed some of his best margins compared to Kerry in '04.

The City is split between 2 House Districts, Dave Obey's and Ron Kind's. Obey's already got his dream job as chair of Appropriations. Kind's a legitimate (very) dark horse for VP, tho his hometown's LaCrosse.

 

 

Democrat for US Senate (Wisconsin 2012)

Well, if that's the case...I wouldn't be surprised if they set up VoIP phone banks (saves batteries and airtime costs for the phoner) with free calling for the phoner but restricted by calling region, maybe, because VoIP gives them finite lists of all numbers called, and the campaign can take it from there. Call data records with reverse name identification applied automatically.

And add to it the social networking you describe. Pretty slick.

If they are doing something like this, Al, they are revolutionizing voter ID and turnout to the nth.

 Your description brought the face of Bill Richardson to mind. :-)

Funny, I don't think I've ever seen Bill Richardson get mad.  Even when he responded to Carville's incendiary "Judas" remarks, he still struck me as remarkably genial under those unpleasant circumstances.

 It just came to mind as I read the description, call it intuition or whatever you want but that face came to me while I read your description. After reading your response up-thread I am assuming you are a man you wants change, it's more than a feeling ;) We can debate about it here or there. McCain should be, and is, fair game from here on out. This is crunch time! No need for us to squabble if we are on the same side.

I'm hoping it will be Joe Andrew. Just kidding.  I'm just trying to get us to temper our expectations here and hope for the best, rather than getting too giddy and being disappointed.

I am definitely in the "change" camp (what exactly has "experience" brought us in the past eight years?)  I want the Obama campaign to swing for the fences with the bases loaded, rather than trying to draw a walk or eke out a bunt (which, as Nate Silver would tell you, is a suboptimal move at this stage of the game).  It's the fourth inning!  Try to drive in as many runs as possible!  Play to win, rather than playing not to lose!

My first choice is Schweitzer.  I think he would expand and reinforce the electoral map in a way that the mainstream media can barely envision.  My second choice is Sebelius (I think she's gotten a little bit of a raw deal from her one State of the Union response).  And my third choice is (surprise, surprise)  Kaine (he certainly can't hurt in Virginia, and his plainness and low-keyness -- or dullness -- might appeal to some undecideds, although I am a little troubled by the reports of unimpressive feedback on him from focus groups).

By the way, that San Francisco Sentinel article you posted in the other thread was a fantastic and fun read.  It kind of made several of the points that I was trying to make here (but, alas, did not do so particularly successfully).

Speaks Arabic. Lived in the Middle East. Speaks Guns & Environment. Very Pragmatic.

Super Smart & Folksy. 

Will attack with common sense.

Knows tons about Energy and has a Plan. It involves coal but sounds feasible.

Al, I will just say that sometimes you tend to jump the gun a bit--as you are only human.  You are correct in your analogy of a compelling blog being akin to a well maintained, productive garden.  Indeed, when I go to some other blogs, with stacatto comments, ad hominum up the ying-yang, etc.--well, let's just say that I don't tend to go back.

This blog is interesting because of developed arguments, interesting asides, and a general congenial atmosphere.

We will all project 'who' Obama should pick, and what are the general politico-social-economic constriants 'should' and do  impact such a decision.  Bottom-line: we project our hopes, intelligence, and desires onto the phenomenon we scrutinize.

Being politically ascendent entails reading the potentials and constraints of the culture/ideology more accurately than our opponents, and I believe that you are heads above most pundits in the US on this point.  Your and Obama's instincts are more correct more of the time during this primary process and general election--and this is what makes your blog compelling.

I have no problem vociferously rebuking or debunking a line of thinking because politics has an emotional component that should never be truncated out of fake politiness.  What I will say, however,  is that Vik has been an engaging commentator on this blog--even though I tend to believe that he is partially tone-deaf to US politics because of the reality of him being born and raised in another culture.  I will say further that there is a pre-linguistic component to understanding how soical relations and politics play out--this is on the level of music and poetry; we can allude to this, but never fully wrap language/concepts around this dynamic.   Like art--politics is an unfolding present in the state of becoming.

Having said this--I do find people from India remarkable in that they tend to be quick studies when they are curious about US politics--and, indeed, many are more well versed in the subject than are many so-called 'political junkies' in the US, myself included.

To be blunt, Al, I simply hope that you could avoid any 'banning' of commentors.  Inferior ideas can be shown as such by sound arguments.  Trolls, of course, are another matter--and it is sometimes a matter of interpretation as to whether someone is simply unsophisticated, or if they are intentionally trying to disrupt and be impertinent.

By the way, last night I attended a strategy meeting with the Obama campaign, and I am simply blown away.  What is happening is a non-hierarchical grass roots movement that compiles and centralizes information on almost a real-time basis.    As designatied 'leaders' we are encouraged to develop neighborhood organizations that get out the vote for Obama.

Think of how this mode of political organization can play out in other significant areas of common concern.   The corporate plutocracy has to be more than a wee-bit nervous. LOL

It's Feingold and has been since January 2007.  Caroline Kennedy being put on the VP Comm.  was the first tip everyone missed.

Be careful with your assumptions.

My "partial tone-deafness" with regard to U.S. politics, as you put it, has nothing to do with my being raised in another culture.  I was actually raised right here in the good ole U.S. of A, and have spent more than 90% of my life on these shores.

No need to generalize about folks from India on my account.

 Since Al is traveling, I will remind us all to be good to each other here.

Vik, I have news for you...we all generalize.  It is how we do it that becomes contentious.

If you spent only 90% of your life here, great, it is still not 100%, and you still didn't have parents that were born here.

No, thiese are not xenophobic statements.

I could move to Inida, immerse myself in the culture, various languages, etc.--and I would be, indeed, somewhat tone deaf as to the deep symbolic and pre-linguistic structures that undergird the multicultural/ethnic reality that is India.

Still, I stand by my generalization--and please dont' try to play the victim and twist what I intended to convey.

 

Christi, I tried to politely take issue with Al's tone toward Vik--as I thought that it was a bit over the top.

But now I am possibliy seeing some of Al's wisdom/prescience.

Stephen,

Sorry, I wasn't trying to play the victim, quite the contrary.  I was just saying that I'll take the full blame for my own views.  It has nothing to do with being raised in India (because I wasn't).  Anyway, let's just move on to a more interesting subject.

Truce!!! Yay! I am proud of you smart men!