If It's Biden, There's a Consolation Prize for Dodd and Maybe for You, Too

Another positive aspect of choosing Biden is that he would fill the anguished cries of the netroots and pundits for Obama to go on the attack.  He would have no problem filling that role and coming up with interesting sound bites attacking McCain.  The positives of his loose lips might outweigh the negatives, and, as you point out, it would be entertaining.

JoAnn

Biden is not my first choice but I have to say that he is quick on his feet. He is photogenic and would cut a good figure as the silver haired elder statesman at the side of Obama. He also makes an excellent attack dog and is three steps ahead of any opponent whether it be a media hack or a Republican surrogate.

As a close neighbor of Delaware, I like your take on Biden.  On the negative and to me it's a biggie, is his continual pander to mega banks.  He nurtured and shepherded some real filth for the mega banks in Delaware. On the upside his manner of straight-talk on the bobblehead loop is endearing to many voters.  I personally don't see what Biden gives Obama, but again defer to the pros.

Dodd heading the Foreign Relations Commitee is a pretty nice thought. After researching Biden's foreign policy record and seeing his current reaction to Georgia, I will understate by saying I'm not thrilled.

Of course, Obama hasn't been any better in his stance on the Georgia issue (this morning he agreed with Biden), but he certainly isn't amplifying it like McCain has been, merely responding when asked about it. He is in a tough spot with foreign policy until he gets into office; until he is running the game, he has to play by the current rules, so we can't be sure whether he'll play by new ones.

Good article on this here: McCain's Georgian Hyperbole

"Neoconservatism's problem, and electoral advantage, is one and the same: By escalating international problems into monumental crises and impending threats, interventionists such as John McCain have been able to appear knowledgeable, "serious," and presidentially tough, all at once. Any competitor preaching policy restraint and rhetorical prudence looks like a wuss in comparison."

If the election turns on the economy, and I hope it does soon, I'd rather see a governor on the ticket than a senator, especially a long-term senator.  Can't Biden be an attack dog, anyway?  He doesn't need to be v.p. to serve a role he already serves.

I'm not 100% sure on this so I'll have to double check, but I'm pretty sure that Senate Democrats (and Republicans) only can have one chairmanship, so, if Biden were to hypothetically become the Vice President, Dodd would have to give up his chairmanship of the Banking committee to become chairman of Foreign Relations (which I'm not entirely sure he'd be willing to do).

I think it's an excellent choice. He's a reassurring pick for folks who still feel some trepidation about Obama's lack of experience. Biden will play well in places like Ohio and Pennsylvania which is in Delaware's back door. Obama really needs an attack dog and Joe would be an effective wing man. Like President Clinton, he'll have to keep his own ego in check but with Clinton we saw so much of his personal grievances and insecurities spilling out in unguarded moments. Biden will have his own unguarded moments but given how restrained he's been lately, tells me that he is trainable (unlike Bill Clinton).

 

 

And if Dodd becomes Chair of Foreign Affairs, he would no longer be Chair of Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, an area in which he has not been very progressive.

Seems like there's a lot of addition by subtraction if Biden becomes the VP nominee!

(Unfortunately, Tim Johnson might be next in line at Banking, which would hardly be an improvement.)

In the comments for the previous post, someone mentioned that Obama wants someone he's comfortable with and who has been loyal.  To this day Biden still hasn't endorsed Obama.  Is that some kind of loyalty I don't know about?

Eliot - You're correct that nobody will chair both the Banking and the Foreign Relations committee. Next in line for Foreign Relations behind Dodd is John Kerry, and behind Kerry is Russ Feingold.

My hunch is - especially after Dodd's negative press over a VIP loan this summer - that he'll be eager to take over Foreign Relations. But if not, Kerry would also be an improvement over Biden and I think he'd take it in a New York minute. (The Foreign Relations committee is where Kerry got his start in political life, testifying as a recently returned Vietnam Veteran circa 1971, and it was the first committee he requested when he arrived to the senate in 1985.)

Jason quoted: "Neoconservatism's problem, and electoral advantage, is one and the same: By escalating international problems into monumental crises and impending threats, interventionists such as John McCain have been able to appear knowledgeable, "serious," and presidentially tough, all at once. Any competitor preaching policy restraint and rhetorical prudence looks like a wuss in comparison."

That seems exactly the trick that Obama needs to pull off - in the VEEP pick, in dealing with McCain's "Hey can we bomb/drill/pander our way out of this?" approach to policy, and in debates and other public forums.  How do you make restraint and wise diplomacy sexy?

And I agree, I would love to see either John Kerry or Chris Dodd as chair of Foreign Relations.

The load-bearing pillar in Obama's foreign policy is that good judgment trumps experience.

His prime example of this is his opposition to the Iraq War and Occupation.  He used it today in his VFW speech, and it was the centerpiece of his critique on McCain.

Picking Biden (or Bayh or Clinton or Dodd or Edwards) crumbles that pillar.  McCain will then be able to say, "It's not just my judgment that the Iraq War was right, it's the judgment of your vice-president."

Weak.  Let's hope it's a governor.

CNN just announced according to Ben Smith that Al Gore will take the stage on Thursday with Barack Obama.... Al Gore and Barack Obama in front of 70,000 people. That's priceless!

I agree with Jason: Biden is not a great foreign policy mind but a beltway self promoter that tries to blow crises out of proportion to suit his short term media profile. He knew that Iraq had no WMDs but voted for the war, and there’s no benefit whatsoever of building the Georgian conflict up to be some major post-Cold War test of leadership when it’s really a military resolution to the status of a small mountain area that should have been resolved through diplomacy. Biden propped up Chalabi in 2003 and he’s propping up Saakashvili in 2008, and an electorate that considers that foreign policy wisdom is not doing its democratic duty. The pick would also indicate that Obama's criticism of NAFTA in the primary was disingenuous. Biden's selection would constitute a sprint to the right so fast he could be checked for performance enhancers, and would seriously call to question whether activist support and the financial support of middle class voters that want change is warranted.

A Schweitzer pick would place the most popular, qualified, and successful leaders at the top of the party and those with a slower learning curve in a position to see what it is they’re doing right. It would also show, as has been said by others, confidence on Obama’s part and resolve to make 2008 a change election. The Bidens and Bayhs in Congress have a lower approval rating than Bush, and in many ways they’ve earned it.

As everything regarding rumors and the obama campaign, take this with a huge grain of salt.

According to http://www.tribbleagency.com/?p=1747 obamasebelius.com is owned by the Obama campaign, while obamabiden.com owned by someone unknown. They also claim that they have a source that says that a site for obamasebelius is already being designed. BTW obamagore.com is still for sale, as is obamadean.com

Biden has another side to him that has not been talked about a lot, but should be if he is chosen.

It's what he called, "The single, most important legislative accomplishment in my 32-year-old career in the Senate" -- the Violence Against Women Act.  He started working on it in 1990 and it got passed in 1994. And he got it reauthorized and has been working on the International Violence Against Women Act and the National Domestic Violence Volunteer Attorney Network Act.

More details can be found at http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/8/14/151122/662/557/567964

I was snarling about Georgia to my husband this morning, as in, I really and truly don't get it, and now that I see Biden trying to gin up money for Georgia, I must say I am simply gobsmacked.

When it comes down to it, this kind of braying is the diplomatic equivalent of cheap grace -- a way of feeling good about yourself without advancing the interests of anyone else, and in this case, including our own. 

WTF is wrong with us?  But since John McCain is the one who evidently got the ball rolling down this path, I must say that I would do just about anything at this point to keep him out of office.  He is a clear threat to national well-being.

to satisfy the most Democrats. He's reasonably well liked among most progressives, older Democrats like him, the Clinton folks don't view it as an insult, and the attack dog crowd will be happy. And while I really like Sebelius and Schweitzer, I do like the idea of having the VP candidate hit the ground running without the need for introductions (well, he will have to be introduced to undecideds, but not the traditional media, which should help impressions form quickly).

"A noun, a verb, and the surge."

Also, as I've argued elsewhere, there are benefits to having a VP with no future ambitions. Edwards/Lieberman certainly shied away from the attack dog role in fear of raising their long-term negatives, and I don't we'll have that problem with Joe.

Of course, we may all look like idiots tomorrow when Obama names Bill Ritter or something.

also: I should say that Al’s analysis of the ramifications is excellent as always, but I’m not looking for consolation prizes. I had thought last night that the fact that Kaine is not slated to speak at the convention, along with Obama’s visit to Virginia tomorrow, the first day a pick is possible, suggested that Kaine would be the pick. Now with the Biden talk, that all ended rather quickly. If Biden is passed over, is there a Biden constituency that is being offended? Delaware voters? People who have been in the Senate since the age of 30? The Biden buzz is keeping Virginians from feeling entitled to VP. Now when we know who the pick is, we’ll know how it all works out.

My concern with Biden is that over the years he's probably left a long trail of careless statements which could be used against him and Obama.  The rightwing machine is real good at finding stuff like that and feeding it to the corporate media, who eat it like candy.

So how many people are so upset that Clinton didn't get the nomination that they'll write her name in?  One percent.

This information comes from a Clinton die-hard site (misspellings in original):

Just contacted Gallop. was told that recently they did a poll where they asked an open-ended question: who would you vote for for president? and based on the result they see no reason to begin polling Hillary's numbers again.  apparently in this poll they said she got about 1%.

http://alegrescorner.soapblox.net/showComment.do?commentId=10064

 

. . . regarding Schweitzer.  I have been mentioning his name for months and months, in the hope that the Obama campaign keeps an eye on the blogosphere.  Schweitzer is as gifted an orator as Obama, but his style is quite different-- Obama's tone is lofty, where Schweitzer's is direct.  Brian Schweitzer is the only politician I have heard who has spoken of the war, energy independence, and environmental conservation as one issue.  He has some great ideas, and he needs to be President someday.  And, as far as I can tell, the best way for that to happen is for him to be the sitting veep-- the heir apparent-- in 2016, as he is term-limited out of running for re-election to the governorship in 2012.

So, yes, I still have a tiny hope that Schweitzer is the dark horse pick, off everyone's radar.  In the meantime, of the three commonly-mentioned picks, Biden is the best.

I fully agree with Dona Hickey that Biden can be an attack dog without being the VP nominee; in fact it's better because if (when?) he crosses the line, he can be sent to the dog house without major repercussions.

Either way, I'd love to see him attack McCain. It's hard to imagine him giving the standard disclaimer "John McCain is a patriot/true American hero"...I think that would just stick in his craw. I can imagine him saying "I've known John McCain for years, and he's a complete jackass!"

Given Barack's vision of a movement beyond the personal, my guess is that he means loyal to the Democratic Party. And who has been a more loyal Democrat than Howard Dean, who in spite of losing his presidential bid, has brought the Democratic Party into the 21st centuray?

What Al Gore will do is deliver a very powerful message - that one's vote is not a toy or a symbol but a way to elect a president and that who is president makes a huge difference. He said that in endorsing Obama and he'll say it to a much larger audience in Denver.  After he speaks, will there even be 1% that will want to throw their votes away by writing in Hillary?

(BTW, here's a Gallup poll with the 1% Clinton voters - It was one where people were asked to name who they would vote for and Obama did better with that than with the polls taken at the same time when choices were offered. http://www.gallup.com/poll/109435/Support-ThirdParty-Candidates-Appears-...)

BUT!

(1) Biden lives in Delaware and commutes. He has the best chance of crafting an out of Washington narrative that doesn't undercut Obama. He also has a great personal story to tell.

(2) Biden will attack. He speaks affirmatively and forcefully and declarativly and he has the stature that his statements are immediatly accepted as accurate by the village: and the village think he's smarter than McCain so that also gives the Obama camp a leg up.

The best thing for Biden is he's a great attack guy and he's a great debater and I would trust him to go down with the ticket and fight through November. The worst thing about him is the plagarism rap; but it seems the press has given him a pass on this. Furthurmore, Joe Biden is likeable. I really do like him even when disagreeing.

The most important thing: he can testify he was wrong on Iraq and tried to limit the powers of the president in this while McCain went blind into Iraq.

I honestly don't think it's Biden, however, because the Obama camp seems settled on the outside Washington argument. And I don't discount the Gov. of Montana. The Obama camp didn't spend the fourth of July there (where both Michelle and Barack spent time with the Gov. family) for their health. I think he has been on the list but since he's not in the beltway loop we dont' know if he's been vetted.

I also think that the fact Dodd DID get vetted as well is good too: the Obama folks seem to have gone that far with only serious contenders. So I think that Obama is looking at a broad aray of qualities. No one still knows what is going to go down.

Which is excellent: hopefully the ticket'll give him a bounce.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/18/cafferty.mccain/index.html

He was better than Keith here.

amk

The Quinniapac poll was just released and McCain scored big with the public on his Georgia posturing. I know, it's hard to believe but this is what we are dealing with, it is what it is. After a lifetime of being a pie in the sky idealist, I'm very pragmatic. Biden's got the foreign cred, just got back from Georgia, working class background, feisty, senior without being too old. I think it's perfect, not from the idealist persepective but from my other, more realistic self. My idealist side will be plenty satisfied with an Obama presidencey.

so the rest of hillary's supporters - the ones who aren't going to write in her name - are all going to vote for obama? dream on. most are aware of the futility of a write-in approach. about 18% are going to vote for mccain, and 10% are going to sit out the general after having voted in the primary. they don't have anyone they can vote for who will represent their interests, so they'll just stay at the house.

obama has 72% of the democratic vote, and mccain has 89% of the republican vote (plus a healthy portion of the independents). obama's supporters running around insulting hillary supporters after the primary is already over are not doing their candidate much good, but hey, it's a free country.

Gore is the one.  Gore would get everyone's attention, it would be a real game-changer.

If Obama chooses Biden or Kaine, I can imagine the questions:  Why him, and not Hillary?

Al Gore would sweep such questions aside.

I would be !excited! to vote for Gore as VP, hoping for a big alternative-energy push.  We've needed to do it for 30 years -- let's get to it NOW!

Biden the clear frontrunner for Veep

I am going to go out on a limb here and say it is going to be Sebelius.

Why?  For two reasons:

It is going to be someone Obama trusts.  Obama trusts Kaine, Sebelius, Dashle, Durbin (ineligible), McCaskill, and others I am probably forgetting.

It is going to be someone exciting, someone who makes us go, "wow," someone who makes us see him as daring, as sticking to his convictions, as unintimidated.  That's how he has run his entire campaign.  I see no reason why he'd change now, for such an important decision, to choose someone timid, careful, safe.  I think Sebelius is the bravest choice he could make out of the above group.  I'll be surprised by a Biden or a Bayh.

thought I did...Can we designate Biden as Official Foreign Policy Slapdowner, and set him loose on McCain with attendant news coverage?

Ah, yes, the Vice-Presidency:  The time-honored way of neutering people.  Of course, that changed with Cheney, but only because nobody ever thought that Bush was running the show here; he's a puppet whose strings are pulled by Karl Rove, among others.  That won't be the case with Obama.

Actually, you guys provoke insults by overreacting to innocuous comments posted by people like Amy Fried.

Today's Q-poll showed Obama and McCain drawing just about the same amount of support from their respective parties, the most recent Gallup tracker aggregates show Obama pulling in around 80 to McCain's 84, so your cherrypicking of poll data isn't terribly convincing.

Furthermore, it's a fact that not all of those 20% are Clinton supporters. Many of them are likely regular Republican voters who remain registered as Democrats while others are genuine undecideds who would also be undecided if Clinton were up against McCain.

As to not having anyone who represents their interests when one candidate has a virtually identical platform... yeah, sure. When people are predisposed to believing every scurrilous conspiracy theory to come out of Larry Johnson's imagination, sweet talk becomes somewhat irrelevant. When you guys concede that Obama's birth certificate is real, then maybe we can chat like adults.

There's a lot about Biden that makes me squirm, from Neal Kinnock to the credit card industry to "bright and clean and articulate" to the "Indians at the 7-11's."

But if he is the pick, there's one thing that cheers me-- it will mark the return of an offensive against GOP rhetoric. Biden isn't primarily about foreign policy as a pick, I'm convinced. Instead, it's Obama's signal that the campaign will be taking it to Republicans rhetorically the rest of the way. Choosing someone based on a flawless background and safe credentials is an invitation to have them torn down (thus Wes Clark would get Max Cleland'ed, and fast). But Obama would be betting that Biden's past would not command more print than his lethal stabs against the Republicans and their policies. I mean, is there any Republican who has a chance against Biden debating foreign policy?

@Campskunk - I'm very interested to know where you are getting your numbers. Could you provide a link?

I don't think that domain info about Sebelius is conclusive either, Konstantinos, but when I did a WHOIS check on obamaschweitzer.com, I found the same GoDaddy/Domains by Proxy setup, the same nameservers (some of the default nameservers for GoDaddy) and the same registration date (Jan 15 2007, last updated Jan 16 2008, expires Jan 16, 2009). So while both sites may have been registered early by the Obama campaign, they may alternatively have been registered by some fan of both governors.

I don't believe in the ad agency leak about Sebelius.

is interesting, because it shows there is no concern for down ballot Dems, be they Congressional or local candidates. It's literally all about Hillary for the PUMAs, not the party and the ideals it represents, which is exactly why Democrats opted for Obama.

Chicago Sun-Times reports Obama and his veep will showcase the new ticket Saturday at the Old State Capitol in Springfield, Illinois.

I can live with Biden a lot easier than Bayh. Hoping for Schweitzer or Sebellius, now that it seems Gore is out.

Hey, Campskunk - I've read your trolling throughout the Internets since last summer. You're like a broken record. You selfishly think that something as gigantic as the presidency of the most powerful nation on earth is about you and how you claim you feel treated by others in response to your bad manners and provocations. I doubt your sincerity and your mental stability. So take a hike and find some other blog to troll. Act like a jerk, funny how you get consistently treated as one.

Apologies to the rest of you for letting that insect through the screen here. Won't happen again!

I've got to say there are few major Democratic Party players that I find as distasteful as Biden. His whole vibration is arrogant and aggressive, and while I probably would still bother to vote for Obama...I'll be honest and say that a pick that far right, mainstream, and for me personally, grossly off the mark, would have me strongly looking at other options (like just meditating or something generally more useful to bring about deeper changes). I was very surprised with Al's previous fairly forgiving assesments of Biden (not to mention his too kind past assesments of McCain- which I've posted on at least once before as well)... I actually doubt it'll be Biden, and think it'll be Kaine...and, at this point, I certainly hope so...even Bayh would be preferable. At least it keeps folks guessing. I just hope he comes through, on such a big issue, in a way that sends a nice signal to the core supporters. Blessings!

Buchanan writes a good piece on the Georgia mess. HuffPo has it on their homepage. Let's hope many read it.

http://antiwar.com/pat/index_pat.html

For those who want more background:

http://www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net/Geopolitics___Eurasia/Saakashvili/...

If you can't distinguish between mentioning the level of Senator Clinton's residual support as demonstrated in a poll and "insulting Hillary's supporters" then I fear you may be too thin-skinned to associate with Fieldhands.

My only thought is:

Remember how Obama faked out the whole press corps when he had his little confab with Hillary in DC.

Do you really believe Obama will be choosing one of the ones he has carefully thrown out as decoys?

Is there anyone left who believes it could be a Governor from Montana?

My colleague Jill Tubman has written this alarming piece about Biden http://www.jackandjillpolitics.com/2008/08/why-bidens-racist-behind-aint...

It should be Schweitzer. He's so smart and laid back and cowboylike. Americans would love him! 

 

 

Keep the faith, friend.

 

O/T Al--are you going to be reviewing Kos's book for us?

Biden's remarks were moronic, but I wouldn't use them to decide the man is a racist.
I for one, think he will a good VP choice, Obama can not dirty his hand with negative attacks, Biden will the that job just fine.

 Moronic comedy/rhetoric is not something I want in a VP. I read and listened to Jill's article and I was quite disturbed by the good old boy tone to his remarks about Obama, Indians and black people. I would not call his remarks 'loyal" and I can not see how Barack would be "comfortable" with it.

Christi - As a matter of fact, I've written my review and it goes up today on Narco News. Will surely post a link here.

 

-a

I just googled for "Biden racism" and the first result was a site whose current lead story is a Corsi-defense piece titled "Obama's Communist Cover-Up Continues."

Looks like sooner or later Sen. Obama would be hurt rhetorically by some bad gaffe or other from his own VP candidate. He's got to know that.

 

Let’s not forget that Gov. Schweitzer can attack McCain more effectively because he doesn’t come at it from the petty, Washington insider ‘scoring points’ standpoint but rather as someone outraged at the way Washington works who’s connected to everyday voters. Remember what Obama said late last year about how he was opposed to the culture of Washington that led to the Iraq War vote? That got him a lot of support. And attack McCain Schweitzer will. A Biden choice would call to question who Obama really is politically and what he stands for. + Montana’s three electors are more in play then Delaware’s. The Time magazine 'leaks' seem really dubious.. coming from the other hopefuls? An email Biden's staff sent out to update names for foreign relations committee press? c'mon.. Would Obama leak the real name three days before the announcement?

I'm not concerned about Biden's loose lips or even the content of his remarks.  He will be the attack dog the Democrats need against the Teflon POW, and if he goes over the top in his attacks against McCain, Obama can always give him the public rebuke and keep the high road intact, AFTER Biden gets the dirt implanted in voters' minds.

I think McCain wants to pick eBay CEO Meg Whitman the day after the DNC, which is why he’s floating the pro-choice veep idea. Unless she can’t function well as a candidate, that creates a favorable comparison for the Republicans of a successful private sector figure against Biden or Bayh, Senators for life, covers McCain’s own weakness on the economy, and gets some of the embittered Hillary crowd to switch sides. McCain said in 2000 he wanted to pick a tech businessman for VP, naming Bezos, Grove, and Yang, two of whom are not naturalized citizens. McCain is way behind on the electoral map so he may roll the dice. The announcement’s in Ohio, but Ohio’s Rob Portman is a bore and worked for Bush. Obama tends to get a lead and play it safe, but as I’ve said there’s a risk that he comes off looking like an old time pol who plugs in his convictions from moment to moment.

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/08/19/1276323.aspx

KD

Thanks for the link, Karen I understand that I'm probably in the minority with this one; but I was hoping that Biden would get the nomination.

 What a glowing review Al gives Kos.

Money Quote-

Markos Moulitsas Zúniga is our era’s very own Saul Alinsky, and Taking on the System is the new and improved Rules for Radicals. For any aspiring organizer, activist, politician, blogger, journalist or communicator to ignore or fail to study its findings would not only be self-defeating: it would constitute a serious form of malpractice.

I ordered a copy online.

Yeah, Time's preoccupiion with wanting Biden chosen has extended to publishing anonymous recommendations on Biden's behalf... all the Biden leaks have come from one source.

Yes, I would be very, very surprised if Obama's choice confirms the conventional wisdom of the msm.

Biden would not be an exciting, innovative choice for VP.

I say at least choose a VP that helps unsettle the electoral map and the moribund conventional wisdom of the elites that are dragging the country into the sewer.

Of course, I could be wrong.  But my hunch is that it will be Schweitzer.  Spending July 4th with the family in Montana inclines me to the belief that the Obama team had decided that Schweitzer was the man this past May, when they knew they had this nomination wrapped up and were planning how their long-term strategy to win this election.

I think that O-man has totally faked the lamestream media and the second-rate political hacks that pass for punditry in this nation.

Folks, it's Kaine, Schweitzer, or maybe Sebelius, though I do not think the last, as fine as she is. Re: Biden, Bayh, Dodd: Why would Senator Obama want to turn to the past? Or another Senator? Or someone who got a preferred rate on his mortgage this year? Or someone who campaigned till he was red in the face for HRC? Or any Washington insider or face we've all seen for too many years on the tv screen. For all their contributions, they are not the change we can believe in. Please.

all those pseudo campaign managers who think that they know better than a professional campign managers are drinving me crazy.
some times I feel they would actually like Obama to lose just to prove that they were right all along....Pathetic!

Do we really think the Obama was just making his mind up on this during the past week? If we know anything of the Obama campaign it is that they are not reactive.  Whatever the pick is, it fits into their strategy (part of which is to pick off some western states like Colorado, New Mexico, Montana - and who knows maybe even Alaska now).

KD

Just saw some video on YouTube and thought, gee, Biden is much more firey than I remembered him.  The guy was thinking on his feet.  Impressive.  

 

 

Thanks for the article, Alexa. Pat B. echos my estimation of this situation perfectly.

The dirty little secret that animates US policy toward Russia comes from deep in the international psyche that compelled strong capitalist nations to send troops into Russian to crush the nascent worker/peasant uprising.

The ruling classes around the world are still frightened to death that the labor they exploit for profit might become weary of this arrangement. The fear is palpable, and it swims always just below the surface.

Throughout history revolutions from below seem to be failures--but the fact is that we would BE history if humans lost the creative imagination and the audacity to become free of our various constraints.

The ruthless, anti-human and ecologically disasterous nature of what is called 'capitalism' is an abject failure--because it is pathological and will always attempt to destroy the host (the health of the earth upon which the efficacy and health of all life depends)

Though Obama will have to navigate the shoals of our barbaric and short-sighted foriegn/domestic policy with care--his presidency is desparately needed at this juncture.

Noam Chomsky aptly descirbed our situation with the title of one of his books: "Hegemony or Survival".

 

Steve: What leads you to believe that Schweitzer might be the choice? I know he's a very popular person on this board (and understandably so), but I haven't heard anything that would indicate Brian being looked at, or that he's the possible nominee.

And, more, think of what choosing an innovative, strong, outside-the-box, relatively young, not too well known, and independent-minded VP would do for Obama's momentum at this pont.

I simply don't see momenetum created with the folks that the msm pundits and corprate scribes would have us accept.

And, maybe, that is the point.  You can see from these folk's logic how utterly devoid of imagination they are.  They cannot and will not imagine that anything could ever be different than the obese, debt-ridden consumerist society that they believe is 'sucess'.

The ruling elites always have a problem with imagination.  When you have the world firmly under your foot, why would they (the herd-masters) want anything to change.

"Change" for this group means simply getting more profit--a bigger tax cut.

 

Steven Hunt,

I agree with you completely. A Biden pick would be so in line with CW. plus it makes Obama look weak. Obama is most confident about his foreign policy/national security knowledge. He does not need any help in this area. Remember he has 300 formal and informal foreign policy advisors. And they did a heckuva job preparing him for his trip that went flawlessly. Picking Biden screams 'I need foreign policy help'. Plus it muddles the change message (his strongest, most identified theme with the voters).

A Schweitzer would help him govern, bring expertise in energy independence, and take the democratic party in a new direction after the clinton era. Plus like Obama he is a self-made man and an unlikely political story.  I strongly feel it is going to be Schweitzer.

If they announce on Friday (as is being rumored) then it would make sense to run ads on NBC with the new ticket on Saturday and Sunday.

Does anyone think Schweitzer and Obama shot ads and/or video for convention together over 4th of July. The director of Al Gore's film was in tow with Obama in Butte on July 4. The press pool reported Obama was in the musuem for several hours for some shoot. 

Question for those more savvy than I -- if Obama picks a male VP, and McCain picks somebody like Meg Whitman, there's no doubt that they will push the identity politics fast and hard, in the hopes of splintering the female vote off from Obama's Democratic base. Given how rigid the right seems to be against embracing a pro-choice VP, I'd say this would be McCain's best strategy.

Given this, does Obama almost by default have to pick Sebelius (or HRC) as a preventitive measure? Or would the effects of such identity mindgames on the part of the GOP be negligible when put up against McCain's anti-women policies and anti-choice stance?

Al, just an idea: remember when McCrack and Obama were querried on their musical tastes last week?

Well, I would like to hear some fellow Fielders recommend, say, five top songs that should be used to create abiance at the convention--and then onward toward victory.

I incline toward one of Barack's fav's Fugies "Ready or Not"--as well as new age hit from the 1990's Enigma's "Return to Innocence".  The Native American tribal chants in the latter would juxtapose nicely with a VP pick from a Western state.

Of course, "The Boss" would also feature in my top five.   A good tune from the Dixie Chicks would also be appropriate.  Some tried-and-true soul artists would work as well.

Metallica's "Hero of the Day" (San Francisco Symphony version) would work for me as well--but that would be a long-shot.

 

KO announces new MSNBC show for Rachel Maddow. Looking forward to her take on the new VP candidate.

Shaina, Schweitzer is just a hunch.  Other Fielders first brought the guy to my attention--plus NPR has done a marginal puff piece on the guy a couple of times.

What increases my 'hunch' is that O-man and company have been doing a pretty good time ignoring him.  Add to this the choice of were the family spent the most patriotic and nationalist of all US holidays.  Spending time in Montana for the Obamas went directly agaisnt age-old conventional wisdom.

The way many of the very sharp people on this board have enthused over Schweitzer also is very compelling.  This guy is both audacious and unique--a left-of-center Democrat would have to be in states that have almost one party hegemony.  More, he has enough sense to keep his mouth shut and remain low-key.   Something tells me that Schweitzer is a skilled chess player as well.

Sort of off-topic, but since we've gotten off topic before...

Speaking of foreign policy, I'm really hoping that Samantha Power will have a position in the Obama administration.

http://www.hks.harvard.edu/about/faculty-staff-directory/samantha-power

It was her "America in the Age of Genocide" and her writing on the (lack of) U.S. reaction to what was occuring in Cambodia, to the Iraqi Kurds, in Bosnia and Rwanda, that not only fueled my own interest in the subject of genocide, crimes against humanity and U.S. foreign policy; but finding out that she worked for Obama led me find out more about Obama, and to become a supporter.

I'm not sure how realistic it is, Power isn't listed as a convention speaker and she hasn't publically been associated with the campaign since the way overblown "monstergate." But, I'm hoping that *if* Power does take an active role in an Obama administration, it will hopefully mean that issues such as the genocide in Darfur will not be pushed under the table.

And for more reading, an interesting article on Obama's foreign policy from the  New Republic: http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=0e0846cd-694f-40d1-a6d9-55e20de176cf

 

Considering today's developments, it's beginning to look like Barack will be picking....Hillary Clinton.  Consider:

 

1.  Barack will be in Virginia during the week, but the announcement will occur Friday evening with a roll-out in Springfield, Illinois.  Seems to suggest it's not Kaine.

 

2.  What about Friday evening?  Isn't that a terrible time to drop news . . . unless the name is so big, so shocking, that it would dominate and drive interest all weekend long.  But who could that be?

 

3.  Biden?  But he just dinged himself.

 

Who else but Clinton makes sense?

Thanks for the Schweitzer info.

I'm wondering as a matter of tactics whether it would be easier to pick a VP that people know (such as a Biden-even though I highly doubt he will be the pick) vs. someone like Schweitzer or Sebelius or Kaine that needs to be introduced to the vast majority of the country?

I also would guess that the VP is probably not Biden, Bayh or Kaine.

I'm also liking Chris Dodd & Jack Reed (sp?) for VP, not that I think that either will be chosen, but of course if I'm wrong on the VP choice I will happily eat crow.

I think that Sebelius or Sam Nunn could also be a dark-horse win.

 

 

That's great about Rachel's new show-I always liked her on Countdown.

McCain would never pick a woman. Outside of his wife, Miss Buffalo Chip, I'm not sure he even knows any (Lindsey Graham doesn't count). He's also only 5'7" so he'd need a woman who wasn't the same height or taller - which I believe eliminates Carly Fiorina, his most vocal female surrogate, and Condi Rice.

O/T - Rachel Maddow just got her own MSNBC show. Hallelujah.

 

Nate, if that's true, that would be *the* greatest head-fake is recent U.S. political history.

I'm glad they told us when they are going to announce the nominee. As much as I hate to admit it, I've been checking online every 5 minutes or so to see if they made their choice.

 

Seems to me with the VP due to appear at a rally in Springfield, with stops in Iowa and Wisconsin on the way to Denver that this is someone who needs an introduction.  If it was someone who needed no introduction it would make sense to play it along all the way to next Wednesday night.  My bet is it's announced around noon Friday, to appear on the nightly news and then the big appearance together in Springfield Saturday.  Also give the VP nominee a chance to appear on the Sunday shows. I'm rooting for in this order, Schweitzer, Sebelius and Kaine.

KD

Where did this sudden chatter about a "Friday evening" announcement come from? (Link, please?)

That doesn't sound like them.

CBS News report.

If Hillary is announced VP I will lay an egg (and I'll Youtube the event to prove it).

check out this video about this topic.

Laura M - That CBS report makes an awfully big assumption based only on the news that Obama will be in Springfield, Illinois on Saturday. I think it made up the Friday text message thing out of whole cloth. There's no source - not even an unnamed one - mentioned in the story at all. I wouldn't take that timeline to the bank!

at the plan to announce the VP first to supporters. Every hack journalist and blogger is pronouncing that they "know" who it is, and I have the satisfaction of knowing that in fact they don't know anything more than I do. Well played by Obama!

Is Obama going to be in Iowa on Thursday by any chance...? I would love for it to be Schweitzer, like so many here, but my feeling right now is Sebelius, and I would be so very happy if it is her.

Update: @Al - Yes indeed. I have not read anything in a long time that is not completely unsourced speculation and I am ignoring it all. However, you did ask for the link :D

Ambinder is talking back his reporting that the text-message would happen Friday night and sees Thursday as a better option.

 

Maybe Kaine, then.....have to give it to Barack, he knows how to pull off theatrics.

Al, my local Obama campaign organizer/ally told me today that the announcement would likely be Friday.

The logic is to keep the news cycle focused on the Obama campaign during the weekend--as it will be going through the convention.

I just pray that I am pleasantly surprised.

The Obama campaign has been too astute to let this turn into a dud, a dlowner situation.

Again, my guess is that this pick will be unique--and the person will help develop the necessary momentum that will build all the way until election day.   Just my hunch.

Al - I just guessed the Friday thing, in that they would want it out there before Saturday's event, but maybe not too soon before, so that everyone stays tuned in and interested for Saturday. No source.
KD

What drama we have surrounding this vp- two weeks ago everyone knew it was going to be Bayh, a week ago everyone knew it was going to be Kaine, and the last two days everyone knows it's going to be Biden and must justify / accept it, until Biden says it isn't him. (But maybe he's just saying that!) Meanwhile, maybe it's Schweitzer (who I, like everyone, love far beyond any other candidate) because, well, there's no sign at all that it will be Schweitzer, so maybe that in itself is a sign that it has to be. I'm as impatient as anyone in wanting to know who the pick is, but when this is all over I'll have to be thankful to the Obama campaign for giving me so much to think about in these long days before the convention.

I'm not crazy about Biden, but if Obama feels like he needs to pick somebody old and grave, well, alright. At least Biden will be too old to run in 2016, leaving it open for someone younger and better to claim the post-Obama slot, and we'll get to re-live this year's primary race with Our Man Schweitzer to fix whatever woes we'll have then. And then we'll have our drama back in full force, everybody dancing in and out of public consciousness and electoral viability, and as we waste the hours at work frantically checking to tell the signs apart from the head fakes, maybe a tear of nostalgia will form in our collective eye for those dog days of 2008 when Obama and Al got myself and so many others to care so much more than we did about any other bozo running for President.

... that I don't think the Obama campaign has the guts to pick Schweitzer as VP?  I'll be thrilled if I'm wrong, but I'm highly skeptical at this point.  Also, Schweitzer being scheduled to speak on Tuesday is probably not the greatest of signs of his being tapped.

Or is that just me being unduly influenced by the Beltway-media industrial complex spin?

This probably isn't the best forum to admit this (as I'm sure I'll take some heat) but, while I am impressed by the campaign's investment in the ground game, I am a little underwhelmed by its messaging and tactics right now (and very disheartened by the thought of Biden, Bayh or Clinton as VP).

I realize that my opinion doesn't necessarily count for much, and I thought that I was the only one who felt this way, but my wife, my brother, my parents, my in-laws and several of my friends all agree with me (all were passionately pro-Obama from the start of the primaries).  Perhaps we're just a little burnt out after all of the excitement from this year.  I also suspect that none of us would mind a little less nuance or finesse from the Obama camp going forward.

Thankfully, it's a nine-inning game, and we're still in the top of the 4th.  The home team hasn't put away the opponent just yet.

I think the very fact that they are texting their supporters the decision first means it's not going to be anyone the MSM has been talking about. I think Al and everyone else here has it exactly right about the head fakes. Toss out the short list as the people whom you've already decided against, and make your supporters feel like you included them in a secret and gave them a one-up on the media. I'm sure they haven't been blind to the disdain many of their supporters have shown for the media, and I for one would find it hilarious if they all had to eat their words and admit they had no idea what was going on.

That also gives me more confidence to believe it's not someone well known in the media. I'm sure this isn't a new idea, but I think the Obama team knows that a vast number of their supporters are familiar with almost all of the possible VP choices, even if the general public is not. And perhaps they are banking on their grassroots support, voter registration drives, volunteer efforts, etc. to get the rest of the voters familiar with whoever the VP is. The priority for Obama, it seems, is to choose someone who's actually going to help him inside the White House, not necessarily to win the presidency. I think he believes in his supporters enough to get him there without the help of the VP choice and whatever states he/she delivers for him. I'd much rather rally behind and defend a VP I respect rather than one I simply think will help us win.

Since we have Schweitzer on our minds again today, Field Hands might enjoy Winning the West: Obama plots route to victory in Republican heartland.

 Thanks for making me laugh out loud!

Vik, please, refrain from being down on O-man.

You will ffind out in the future that the VP was chosen positively in May.

The MSM are feeding you what the msm can envision--and by their nature they are half blind 'company' men and women.   Obama has out-strategized the establishment all the way to the point of almost becoming the leader of the US.

Choosing the VP is so crucial--because the choice will define the tenor of the campaign going into the general election.

Ask yourself this:  why all the hype about text-message announcements if the person chosen wouldn't create buzz and excitement?

Vik, your commentary is usually above the fray and astute.  Do I have to come through the internets and slap you upside the head?

Believe me--history is being made.

I for one, once all this election stuff is over with, am gonig to thouroughly enjoy seeing the documentary of how this whole thing has come together.  Obama has remarkable political instincts--and he has a tremendous ability to choose his associates wisely.  The VP choice will jibe with his record.

Indeed, I can guarantee you that the Republican advisors aren't fooled by the MSM hogwash about Biden and Bayh.  I can almost guarantee you that MCCrack will choose an out-of-the-box running mate, and it won't help him--because Obama and his VP will have the big mo in their pocket.

 

Steven,

Thanks for your comments.

I admit it.  I'm a little burnt out. Perhaps I should withhold judgment on the Obama campaign until Saturday.

Plus, the Red Sox have been playing like crap recently.  That always puts me in a dour mood.

Best,

Vik

 

In North Carolina, Obama said:

"Here's what I do want from my vice president, I want somebody who has integrity, who's in politics for the right reasons, I want somebody who is independent. 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 will give me (applause) 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 vice president.  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. 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 want 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."

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/08/your_vp_senator_wha...

Ambinder points out that Obama didn't say "he or she." What I think is important is the emphasis on where the person came from - their roots in the American people and their commitment to helping and empowering the American people.

That doesn't rule out Biden for me and it doesn't sound like Bayh. Not sure otherwise.

After strongly disliking the Clintons for too many years to count, I'm at a point where I don't care anymore if it is Clinton. Let's face it - everyone's already used to her. The two of them can hit the ground running; there's no getting-to-know-her period; she'll bring in money and, allegedly, voters. And her incredibly irritating supporters will finally STFU. 

My opinion, humbly submitted.

Random thoughts...

If Barack is feeling comfortable and confident then I think we will see a choice like Sebelius or Sweitzer.  (My heart was almost pounding earlier at the thought that it really might be Sebelius!) If he is still feeling bold then I think we'll see someone who is not from Washington and who shares his brand (change) in a serious way.

The only way we will see a cautious choice is if Barack is not so happy with where things stand, or has been knocked off his game by the war in Georgia or by McCain gaining traction with his lies, in which case he might choose someone like Biden.

I will be disappointed if he chooses someone from Washington because I think it will mean Barack is dong the "safe" thing, and this campaign has never been about safe. It has been about bold.  With the choice of someone like Biden I would wonder if Barack is starting to doubt his ability to be elected on his own terms - without having to resort to negative attacks and without having to make the traditional choices.

My first take on the Joe Biden comment earlier - "I'm not the guy" - with a big grin on his face - was that Barack had decided on Kathleen Sebelius, so Biden was just yanking their chains with his reference to "the guy".

Then I read the Ambinder article linked above, and it says this:

"Sen. Barack Obama usually describes his vice presidential nominee with two pronouns joined by a conjunction... "he or she."  Tonight, in North Carolina, according to CBS News's Maria Gavrilovic, Obama was gender specific."

I have to admit my heart fell when I read that Barack had said only "he" at least twice in the description of his VP today.

I doubt that the campaign would put the word out that we will get the text about VP on Friday night - they want all of us keeping our phones nearby and checking the web for the announcement that may come any minute.  Telling us it's not until Friday just doesn't make any sense.

waiting for the frenzy to subside.  If this campaign let this many days of nervous, seriously mixed, well-all right-okay, pre-announcement announcing go down I'd fall down in a faint.  The very fact said from the get that it's not Biden.

Language out of NC tonight, w/ a couple of other things lying out there, has made me adjust *slightly* my Gore belief: if it isn't Gore (and the speaking news doesn't phase me--note its absence from today's DNC release, and the VP can introduce the candidate), it means that the biggest head fake of all was the long statement Webb gave mid-summer.  It is not someone less exciting or less well-known than these two people--the narrative arc is a lot tighter than it was, and this text msg *has* to be a bombshell, now.  And no, Ralph, it's not HerRC!

Halperin changed "Bo knows the pick" to "Beau knows," disclosing his source as Beau Biden, Joe's son. Joe may be covering for his son by dousing the story.

The choice of Springfield, Illinois for Obama to have his first campaign event with his vice presidential running mate this Saturday is not accidental, knowing what we know about his campaign: they don't do things without carefully thinking them through. Obviously by going to Springfield, he's returning to where he announced his presidential candidacy, in order to come full circle and launch the next phase of the campaign (symmetry is good). But more importantly, he may want the backdrop of the state capitol and the legislature where he got his political start, to make two points: (a) Solving problems for ordinary Americans doesn't begin in Washington, it begins at the grass roots, and he needs all Americans who want change to feel a part of his campaign; and (b) Our nation's most creative and capable leaders came directly from the states: Abraham Lincoln, Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton (mentioning Clinton will stroke the Clintons). At which point he coronates his running mate, Governor Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas (or Kaine of Virginia). It would be a perfect way to reinforce at high volume the "we're going to change our government like it hasn't been changed in a generation" core theme of his candidacy, and dramatically validate Sebelius or Kaine's qualifications. This would work better for Sebelius, because she's been a governor for six years, while Kaine has been in office for only two (and has far fewer accomplishments to his credit). Maybe something along these lines is in the offing...

And what has Al Gore always said...change comes from the people wanting change. Oh man, this sentence says so much to me but I'm afraid to really get excited because if it is Gore, I think it'll be the best 35th birthday present anyone could give me!

"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 want 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."

My birthday's Thursday the 21st, so we'll see. That said, I like the idea of Sebelius and Schweitzer too and would now stomach Hillary to win...but GORE-that's earth moving for me! Has he (Gore) finally had enough and decided that in order to fix this country, he needs to help Barack get us back on track. He'd be doing it for the right reasons...he doesn't need a presidency. He's out for higher things like helping our President save this country and the world! Think big and then think bigger and that's where Gore is coming from mentally.

Cathy, I'd been thinking that Webb is still a possibility.

I saw an article narrowing VPs based on the pair's domain DNS info. Just for kicks, I found that obamaschweitzer.com, obamasebelius.com were both registered on the same day: Jan 15, 2007. This is the day before Obama announced he was forming an exploratory committee. Both those domains also use the same registrar and nameservers as barackobama.com.

None of the following domains match Obama's site: obamabiden.com, obamabayh.com, obamakaine.com, obamanunn.com, or obamadodd.com.

The first section of the passage that Ambinder quoted is clearly a reference to the current VP, as the things Obama mentions are all things that Cheney has done. The word "he" appears only in this passage, as far as I can tell, and I believe it is a reference to Cheney. When Obama was talking about the characteristics of his VP, he used "they". Do not give up hope for Sebelius on this account.

T. Plebius@10:24 p.m.  I am from Springfield, IL.  Just to clarify.  The backdrop that is proposed is the Old State Capitol - the same one he announced his candidacy from in February, not the current one that houses the legislature that Obama once served in.  I like your post,  although I think Kathleen Sebilius is an unlikely prospect because of the PUMAs.  I personally think she would be great.

 @ Ezzy-Girl, I am with you.

If not Gore, I pray for Schweitzer. Now, Ezzy, join the fieldhands in our area before I have to hunt you down ;) & oh, btw, Happy Birthday!

want to be in it too. As a complete outsider as can be, I pick Schweitzer or Gore. Obama better listen to me, dammit.

@ Orlando Sanchez - Thanks for that funny vid. Laughed out aloud when Richardson was dogmatically trolling for himself.

amk

My choice is whoever can help Obama win the WH. If that person is HRC, I'd be more than happy to have her be VP.

Laura, thank you for clarifying what you did.  I had recognized the references to Cheney but I hadn't caught the distinction you did.  Now that I have read it again, I agree with you. 

I'm w/ you oon the BD wishes!  I turn 44 this fall and ALL I want is the right 44th president.

Thursday IS the likeliest day--HBD in advance!

has caused some of you to have some laughs!

We have to inject some fun into this nail-biting times! You have to have music and comedy right!

From what Amy Fried cites above:

I want somebody who has integrity, who's in politics for the right reasons, I want somebody who is independent. 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 will give me (applause) 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 vice president.

The bar has been raised very high. It makes me hopeful that it will be someone fantastic.

Now, this is interesting. I made a sleepy trip to the Barack Obama youtube user site at http://www.youtube.com/profile_videos?user=BarackObamadotcom , to collect video links for my full-length speeches page (http://www.cantelow.com/obama/ -visit!), and found a half-hour video of Tim Kaine right near the top, that was put there just 11 hours ago.

Hmm, wonder if we'll get a Tim Kaine announcement early tomorrow, heh.

I would be surprised in Tim Kaine is the choice, and personally, while I think he has been a wonderful surogate for Obama; I'm not sure what he brings to the table in terms of foreign-policy experience. I think Obama has shown very presidential judgment on foreign policy decision; that doesn't change the fact that in the media Obama is branded as a "novice" when it comes to foreign policy.

Furthermore, he's only been governor for 2 years, with some mixed result. His most positive attribute is that he's not from D.C., and works well with Obama.

But, if we go by his statement earlier today, Obama said the number one qualification for a VP is someone who is capable of being President; I'm not sure if right now Kaine meets that criteria.

 

He's a walking, talking reminder of George W. Bush.

Still, I think it's unlikely.

Nice catch Ann. Kaine comes across as a down to earth smart advocate for Obama. The closing tag is very interesting!

Ruth Marcus column

"It's not that Obama has a problem with female voters. To the contrary, he does significantly better among women than among men. It sounds paradoxical, but the campaign, lagging badly among white men, may have its biggest growth potential among female voters. Women, especially women without a college education, tend to make up their minds later. Recent polls show twice as many women as men are undecided."

Would a woman VP help?

KD

Thought y'all would appreciate this:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/8/19/192145/283/887/570669

KD

are going bananas over a Zogby poll... a ZOGBY poll! They keep yammering about trendlines, thinking that Zogby's last outlier represented some sort of valid result. It's always landslide or doom for these folks, they can't accept the fundamental fact that this is going to be an excruciatingly tight race.

This column from the Chicago Tribune is very funny:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/chi-schmich-20-aug20,0,1214305.column

it's the Zogby Interactive (i.e. online) polls that are marginally better than random number generators. Zogby International is merely below average, although among national pollsters, they still beat ARG and, amusingly, Gallup, at least as far as state-by-state polls go. Also, this is the fifth national poll out of 180+ (counting the Rasmussen and Gallup trackers, each of which has updated once a day since June 3 except over July 4 weekend) since the end of primary season to show McCain with any sort of lead. Of the other four, three came within two days of each other, and the fourth was that USA Today/Gallup poll with the bizarro RV/LV split.

Yesterday in North Carolina, Obama called his vice president a "he".....

Back from long vacation.  Good being unplugged for a while. Michael Moore posted open letter to Caroline Kennedy and Obama last night, asking them to consider "pulling a Cheney" and nominate Caroline.  Never really thought about that.  Obama-Kennedy.  Thoughts?

Not trying to sound rude, since I have a lot of admiration for Caroline Kennedy, but what the rationale or logic behind choosing Kennedy?

 

Shaina, you did not sound rude.  I understand your question.  I hadn't really thought about Kennedy, but after reading the open letter I started thinking about it.

Moore suggests that while she has chosen 'to live a life outside of politics, to work for charities and schools, to write and lecture, to raise a family... she did not choose to lead a private life. She has traveled the world and met with its leaders, providing much experience on the world stage, a stage she has been on since she was a little girl. '

In his letter he states,

"So many families are hurting, losing their homes, going bankrupt with health care bills, seeing their public schools in shambles and living with this war without end. This is a historic year for women, from Hillary's candidacy to the numerous women running for the House and Senate. This is the year that a woman should be on the Democratic ticket. This is the year that both names on that ticket should be people OUTSIDE the party machine. This is the year millions of independents and, yes, millions of Republicans are looking for something new and fresh and bold (and you are the Kennedy Republicans would vote for!)." 

I really have no idea who Obama will choose.  Looking forward to the announcement next week.  Moore's letter simply got me wondering.

http://dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/8/20/12179/3917/478/571094

Kos says that we shouldn't freak out about that Zogby poll; after all, while Obama's usually in the 45-50 range nationally, McCain's yet to break 45.

Anne in IL - that was too funny!

I wonder if the young pups will recognize the first few lines as song lyrics from a long time ago...