Jim Webb Auditions As Top Obama Surrogate
Jim Webb takes a crack at proving that he can be an effective high-profile surrogate for Obama in an interview with The Huffington Post.
The key takeway from the interview is that Webb is clearly trying to showcase two ways he can act as an effective messenger for Obama. First, his military cred enables him to effectively take on McCain with Obama's foreign policy message about negotiating with hostile foreign powers...
"Under the right circumstances, you have to [talk to your enemies]," he said. "My model for Iran is China in 1971. China was a nuclear power, it was a rogue state, it had American war on its border with Vietnam, it was spouting the same kind of hostile rhetoric. We took none of our military options off the table, we abandoned none of our alliances, but we reached out in a aggressive way diplomatically to bring China into the world community."
Second, Webb tries to demonstrate that he would be able to effectively make Obama's case to Appalacia and rural Americans, arguing that affirmative action, rather than entrenched racism, is the problem. "If you can get the rural whites in this country at the same table as African Americans, it would be good for American politics. I think Barack Obama has the potential to do this," Webb concludes.
The rest here.
Greg -
Are you ever going to do an in depth story on the amazing fact that Barack Obama is the first African American nominee for President of the United States?
That the world is in awe right now? That the world finally feels America is living up to the potential that Bush almost destroyed permanently in their eyes.
Or, are you going to continue pushing HRC stories that have absolutely NO basis in reality? You've done 2 already.
HRC lost.
This is about Barack Obama now. 100%.
Not what's next for HRC.
(Yes, I'm aware this story isn't about HRC)
June 5, 2008 11:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
♪♪♪
♪♪♪
June 5, 2008 11:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
Ditto on that one. We are witnessing history here.
June 5, 2008 11:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
I know. The silence in certain corners is amazing. Another blog that is amazingly silent on anything positive for Obama is Steve Clemon's The Washington Note.
June 5, 2008 11:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
webb is great, but is having 2 senators on a ticket a good idea?
June 5, 2008 11:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well Webb, in his defense, has not been a Senator for very long and has held many important positions within the Governement going back a long time.
He is also an established author and a damn good man.
June 5, 2008 11:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
that's true. he was reagan's navy sec.
June 5, 2008 11:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
Webb is needed in the Senate!
But Barack gets to choose.
June 5, 2008 11:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
I agree.
Poblano makes a strong argument for Gov. Schweitzer here
June 5, 2008 11:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
That's not Poblano, that's the site's other blogger.
June 5, 2008 12:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Webb's comment about being "able to effectively make Obama's case to Appalacia and rural Americans" is somewhat muted by the fact that ex-Senator Maccaca beat him pretty well in rural Virginia and Appalachia. Webb won due to his strong showing in the DC suburbs down to Richmond and over to Norfolk as well as in Roanoke.
June 5, 2008 12:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
I liked this snippet:
Whether Webb's a good VP pick or not, I'm glad the ensuing hype over him will combat the "dream ticket" nonsense that will be in full effect now that Clinton's throwing in the towel.
June 5, 2008 11:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
didn't sen. webb mention in an article by the hill that he wasn't interested in the vp slot? could he be lobbying for another position? like secretary of defense?
June 5, 2008 11:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry Jim Webb, Joe Biden will be BO's VP.
June 5, 2008 11:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
I still don't think he would be a good choice for VP. Obama doesn't need to win Appalachia, and if we are just looking at demographics Richardson is the holy grail in terms of getting us more votes and more states, including possibly TEXAS (including one of their Senate seats!!)!
Webb is a decent guy, but he has too much baggage, the wrong personality for the position, sends the wrong signal about what Obama needs or doesn't need, and we need him to retain his Senate seat.
June 5, 2008 11:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
Go webb. Perfect fit. He will help obama with the working class voters and with national security cred. He is a total hard a**, take no nonsense kind of campaigner. Perfect difference from obama. He would be a great attack dog, which is what the vp is supposed to do. Also, he was a vocal opponent of the war from the beginning. No flip flopping from webb. Obama/Webb 08.
June 5, 2008 11:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
I know we disagree on this, but do you really think being hard ass attack dog is a good thing? You say he is a "perfect difference from Obama", and I guess I'd say that is one of my points about why he wouldn't be a good choice. I don't think we need something 180 degrees from Obama in terms of experience and personality, I think that signals a lack of confidence in what Obama is all about. I think we need someone who reinforces what is so great about Obama, not someone who is completely different. I think Webb is a good guy overall, but I just think it would be a huge mistake for VP, I think it would look like Obama needed a tough guy to take care of the big issues for him...it just wouldn't be good at all. Webb is his own man, he has a big personality, he has a commanding presence, it wouldn't work well as a VP for anyone. Webb is doing a great job in the Senate, I think he should stay there, at least for now.
June 5, 2008 11:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well, I respect your points definitely. I guess we just agree to disagree. I don't think obama needs a clone as vp, that won't help expand his draw of voters. He actually needs someone different. That could only help him in the election. Also, the vp is supposed to be the attack dog. Webb going after mcbush and his pick. That would be a sight. Webb is not obnoxious, he just hits his points in a bulldog sort of way. Just my two cents.
June 5, 2008 11:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well of course we can't get a clone of Obama, there is only one Obama ;)
I'm not convinced Obama needs an attack dog, I mean look at what he has been doing to McCain over foreign policy, McCain's supposed "home turf"? He is tearing him up masterfully, without even breaking a sweat. He manages to go on the attack without looking negative or overtly partisan. He has absolute control over his message and is floating like a butterfly and stinging like a bee. I think if Webb or any other hard hitting attack dog VP were in the mix it would kind of soil what Obama is doing here.
Oh well, we all have our preferences and they all probably don't matter at all because in the end Obama is going to pick who he thinks is best, and I'm sure he'll make a great choice. Either way the Democrats are going to kick some serious ass, unless Hillary is on the ticket, then I'd have to downgrade our chances a little.
June 5, 2008 11:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
With the clintons, I would downgrade our chances alot, not a little. Other than that, I guess we will see what happens. One thing, I am confident, as you are, that obama will make an excellent choice. Go Obama!
June 5, 2008 11:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, I think it would downgrade it a lot too, I was just being charitable ;)
June 5, 2008 12:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
I actually agree with you, Michael. I think that two things about putting Webb on the ticket that should not be underestimated is that first, Obama and Webb are virtually identical in policy and second, they could expect to enjoy complete trust between one another. I like to think of Webb and Obama as complimentary. Both are clear thinking intellectuals adept at strategy but Webb is the fire to Obama's ice. And it doesn't hurt that he is a willing and able pit bull to unleash at McSame.
Perhaps most importantly, I'd dying to see 'catcher's Mitt' Romney (if he is McSame's vp pick) soil himself when they talk foreign policy and defense in the vp debates! ;-)
June 5, 2008 3:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Two other thing that I forgot and a way that both obama and webb are the same. They are both incredibly intelligent. Also, they have the same theory of foreign policy, tough and aggressive diplomacy first, military option as an absolute last resort. My two more cents.
June 5, 2008 11:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
They are both intelligent that is true.
Urg, I just can't shake the bad taste in my mouth about Webb's whole view of Vietnam and blaming liberals. I know it was all shaped by his being the military, but I just can't get behind him because of that...it was such an important time in our history, and such a giant debacle, much worse than Iraq, and he was on the wrong side of it, its just not good. To his credit he was against Iraq, which is surprising, although I've heard it was mostly for pragmatic reasons, not so much ideological.
What's your take on all that?
June 5, 2008 12:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Couple things, again I want to preface this by I totally respect your opinion.
1. On Vietnam, Webb's position is not surprising for having fought there bravely and as an officer. He really is a genuine hero. I think that that is attributable in part to the times in the 60's and his personal views.
2. On Iraq, he was against the war from the start for a host of reasons. One being that there was no way that we could control the country after we invaded. Another you don't want to put the us military in the middle east, the population hates us and it would cause more problems than it was worth. Another diplomacy could control hussein and hussein really wasn't a threat. I know that there are a bunch more that I can't remember right now. Talk about a crystal ball and good judgment. He left the republican party over the war.
Also, his social positions have always been moderate to, oh my gosh a dirty word, liberal as far as I can tell. You should listen to some of his speeches sometime. The guy is truly amazing and smart as a can be.
June 5, 2008 12:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
I totally respect your opinion and insight as well.
I agree that he is a fine candidate, and from what I've seen a natural leader. I'm sure his beliefs concerning Vietnam were just a sign of his situation at the time, but I still don't think I'd feel completely comfortable having him as VP with his stated positions on that issue being what they are. But who knows, I'll follow him more closely in the future and perhaps he can redeem himself, after all I rarely agree with everyone on everything. For now though I still think that there are better choices for VP, although I'd still pick Webb over Hillary and a few others on the long list.
There aren't actually that many choices that I'm all that impressed with. For me Richardson stands out quite a bit from the rest, most of the other oft-mentioned options are second-tier as far as I'm concerned...but I'm open to anything, and I'm sure we'll learn a lot more about all of the possible choices in the coming weeks, so I look foward to it.
June 5, 2008 1:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Amen to that.Obama needs a VP that will offer not only support, but contrast. Contrast in temperament, constituency, background and perspective. Webb will relate to a portion of the American populace fed up with 8 years of Bush and uncertain about 4 years of McCain, but are skittish of voting for an African American. It's not racism exactly, and I'm not offering excuses, but there's a discomfort out there that can't be denied. I believe Webb would offer those voters "permission" to get beyond their discomfort and vote in their own best interests.
Obama/Webb 08
June 5, 2008 1:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
No to Webb for a 18 million reasons.
1) No candidate should pick a VEEP to "shore up his national security cred" because that is admitting that it needs shoring up. Do you really want to send the message that Obama is not up to the job in this area?
2) Webb is offensive to many women voters. I will not vote for McCain under any circumstances, but I will not vote for a presidential ticket with Webb on it. I will write in Edwards or Donald Duck, but I cannot in good conscience vote for that man to be in the White House and a heartbeat away from being able to appoint Supreme Court justices. I know he has apologized, half-heartedly and years and years too late....and only after it became an issue that could cost him election.
June 5, 2008 8:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
I like Webb, but I fear he's not the best offering to die-hard Hillary supporters - he's written some steamy sex scenes into his novels (so I've heard)made a negative crack years ago about women in the military, and has been married three times, most recently to a considerably younger woman.
None of this upsets me personally - however I can see that some feminists would have a legitimate beef, as in "couldn't you make an effort to find someone without this baggage?"
June 5, 2008 11:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
You may be right.
I am trying to have some faith in Obama's veting team. I guess time will tell.
About his steamy sex scenes, bah, unimportant and kind of weak compared to scooter libby's books. Scooter had women being raped by bears. That sounds like a nightmare of Stephen Colbert's.
June 5, 2008 11:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed. The sex scenes mean little (think of Lynn Cheney's woman-on-woman action in the wild west -- very bizarre), but his comments about women in the military would not be helpful. Plus, didn't he really push against women being enrolled at Annapolis?
Also, maybe we can see Obama's surrogates as simply talking about what they believe in rather than auditioning for another job? I know party politics depends on this massive architecture of ambition, but maybe, sometimes, that ambition is simply to put the right people in office so the right policies can move forward.
June 5, 2008 11:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't see that this is a case in which Webb is obviously trying to "showcase" anything. Believe it or not, politicians are sometimes interviewed, and say what they think in the interview, without necessarily "running" for anything.
June 5, 2008 11:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
The VP speculation is going to make the next couple of months a lot of fun. Who knows Caroline Kennedy just might select herself. Darth Cheney did.
June 5, 2008 11:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
There are many things I like about Senator Webb. I was listening to an interview with him and he decried the anti-intellectualism in the US, especially in the media. He was trumpeting rational thought in policy, and calling for an end to the desctructive nature of us vs them politics, and a return to compromise.
I like Senator Webb.
But, there are many good candidates for this position. Vett'em, and let's see where we are.
June 5, 2008 11:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
For those thinking Webb would be a good choice, watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UebXkJhGpyA
listen to his response to his own quote: "Woman Can't Fight"
June 5, 2008 11:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
typo - "Women can't fight"
I recognize that his thoughts have changed, but his answers are frankly weak, and he doesn't seem to grasp how hurtful his comments are.
June 5, 2008 11:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
I definitely respect your position and feelings. However, I would hate to hold that one obvious mistake against him. He actually had a very good record while sec of the navy in expanding women's roles in the navy. And there are a host of other things that he has down that counter weigh that poor exercise in judgment on his part a long time ago. It obviously is a problem for him though.
June 5, 2008 12:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
like complaining about hte liberal media? like complaining about universities and academic elites being all liberals?
Yes, he's an economic populist. So is Pat Buchanan and OBama better not put Pat Buchanan on the ticket.
June 5, 2008 8:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's not one mistake.
Check out Webb on the Scots Irish, on academia, on Vietnam, on women in the military (not just once) on liberals and Vietnam.
He's an economic populist. So is Pat Buchanan. Want him on the ticket?
June 6, 2008 2:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good find. Because of this issue, Webb would be a bad choice in any circumstance; in this one, Obama would appear to be rubbing Hillary's face in the dirt.
June 5, 2008 12:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
I know it won't happen because two senators aren't the best mix but I so enjoy Sen.Boxer and think she would be a great VP candidate!
June 5, 2008 11:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
i love boxer, but then ahnold would appoint an R to her seat.
June 5, 2008 12:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
On the other hand, here is Obama stumping for him.
The whole thing is good, but he starts talking about Webb around the 6:30 minute mark.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SohLrUXL_5g&feature=related
June 5, 2008 12:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Man, obama is an awesome campaigner. Wow, great speech, as always. Thanks for the link.
June 5, 2008 12:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
So:
Webb brings in Military experience, and will help in rural areas, and is another credible voice to end the war in Iraq.
Cons: He could be portrayed as being "sexist" (even though I don't believe he is), be the question is will McCain be able to attack on this? I bet McCain has said some.... regretful things in his past.
June 5, 2008 12:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
BUT the question is....
June 5, 2008 12:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yep, tough call. I think that they can deal with this problem with webb and defuse it. The question will be whether they want to have to deal with it. Also, every vp nominee will have some sort of problem, guaranteed, so the question is what do you want to have to deal with.
On mcbush, mcbush has said some nasty things in the past and trashed his first wife when he got back from nam. There hasn't been alot of press on this, but it probably will come out in the general. I don't think mcbush will be able to try to take advantage of the situation if webb is the nominee.
June 5, 2008 12:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have not seen this mentioned anywhere yet, but I think Obama appointing Caroline Kennedy to his VP vetting team was a very gracious move and shows his gratitude to the Kennedy's for supporting him early on, when it took a lot of courage to break with the Clinton mystique.
June 5, 2008 12:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
By all means give Webb a cabinet seat but he is not a good VP choice. I think as VP, Webb is conservative enough to cause real friction among the newly shaping Dem Party and thus disharmony. The next election may have veto proof powers but still won't get anything done without a sense of unity.
On this matter I still think Edwards is the key to unlocking the appalachian states via having Hillary like campaign proposals without the Clinton baggage which is the best thing about Edwards and he cleary knows how NOT to be the backseat diver that Hillary would most definitely be as VP.
June 5, 2008 12:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
I would LOVE for Edwards to be VP.
But he's said he won't do it....
So, next best choice?
June 5, 2008 1:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ok tpm, so now until the vp nominee is selected you will be trashing and ignoring all other candidates except for the clintons? On the front page you have a link for the case against webb. I get that, but why not also have a link for the case for webb. How about a little fair and balanced. Thanks!
June 5, 2008 12:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
The op-ed Webb wrote in 2004 for WSJ (referenced in the last graf of the HuffPo piece) is available in full here: http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110005798
He was writing in October 2004 when he felt the Scots-Irish vote (simplified in the HuffPo piece to “Appalachian”) was the GOP’s ‘secret weapon.’ (Webb was also promoting a book he wrote about the Scots-Irish culture and its impact in North America. So he knows what he's talking about.)
The last sentence of his WSJ piece: “In fact, the greatest realignment in modern politics would take place rather quickly if the right national leader found a way to bring the Scots-Irish and African-Americans to the same table, and so to redefine a formula that has consciously set them apart for the past two centuries.”
I agree that Webb has some baggage that may not make him Obama’s ideal VP (how ‘bout Mark Warner of VA?). But I do think Webb can help Obama achieve ‘the greatest realignment in modern politics’ even if he is not the VP nominee.
June 5, 2008 12:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry, Joe Biden is not on anyone's short list for VP.
For starters, Delaware's 3 lousy Electoral College votes don't make a bit of difference.
Biden gets the Secretary of State nod, because that's where his strengths are and that's whwre he's needed.
June 5, 2008 1:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Me too.
June 5, 2008 1:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Anyone else get the feeling with all this talk of potential cabinet members, that we're choosing superheroes for the Justice League?
June 5, 2008 1:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
On the Appalachian Scots-Irish topic: great book called Albion's Seed, which traces the four cultural groups of Brits (Pilgrims/New England; Quakers/Delaware Valley; Anglican/Tidewater; and Protestant(Highland) who came to America, where they settled, how they began to overlap and what the cultural meld began to imply. Not up to 730 pp even though it is a page turner of sorts? Then, for the visual learners among us, a 2pp table at the end, which lists 65 life tasks down the side and then cross summarizes what each group believes in. For example: Child Rearing> Pilgrim=will breaking; Quaker= will enhancement; Anglican=will bending; Protestant= will for the sake of will. Really fascinating to apply to voter blocs in this election. And a bonus: better than therapy for explaining your family of birth attitudes.
June 5, 2008 2:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Someone on here a few days ago made an interesting and persuasive case for Mark Warner, about whom I knew nothing. Has anyone heard or read anymore on that possibility? I haven't seen anything?
June 5, 2008 2:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
How about Bill Frist. TN would flip then.
Maybe the Republican governor in Indiana, Mitch Daniels. Indiana would would flip then.
June 5, 2008 3:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
I really think before everyone gets too excited about Webb, they should read this.
http://matthewyglesias.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/05/ixnay_on_the_ebbway.php
Please remember we WANT Hillary's women supporters to move to Obama.
June 5, 2008 3:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
In response to the first comments on this thread -- HRC denied Obama his glory moment by NOT CONCEDING on Tuesday and endorsing him. Obama had to declare himself the nominee. So the drama between HRC and Obama continues in the media.
She should be ashamed. The primary race was very tight, but there is no denying that Obama won, and there is no need for a recount. Sometimes you lose elections 51 to 49.
As for Jim Webb, he's a bit of a maverick and loose cannon. I like the idea of a VP with military cred, but i'm liking even more the strong stance that Obama is taking on National Security. Maybe he doesn't need him.
June 5, 2008 3:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
For more about Webb and his new book, see this New York Review of Books article, The Jim Webb Story.
June 5, 2008 3:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
One more positive for Webb:
It will constantly hammer home that McCain skipped the GI Bill vote.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKRMTkutuMA&feature=related
June 5, 2008 3:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yep, I hate to pile on more praise, but out of everybody in the gd senate webb, more than any other senator, has been backing up the troops big time. All the republicans do is yap and send them into the field as cannon fodder. Webb really cares about the troops, wants to protect and help them and bring them home asap. He puts actions with words. The guy is awesome.
June 5, 2008 4:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ixnay on the Ebbway
June 5, 2008 4:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
While I'm generally a Kathy G fan, that post, coupled with the subsequent comments, only bolsters my appreciation of Webb as a potential VP pick.
June 5, 2008 5:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
It was not some "crack" about women in the military. He wrote a long article about why women should not be allowed in the military. This article was very influential and has harmed women in the military who rightly blame Webb for much of the harassment they endured when they entered the military. He has apologized, years late and only when it looked like it could cost him the election. His apology was half-hearted and inadequate.
Additionally, Webb is a proponent of the "stabbed in the back" revisionist excuse for the debacle of Vietnam. According to Webb, Vietnam would have been fine if not for all those horrible liberals, college students, university elites, and others who betrayed the military at home.
Choosing Webb is just another example of personality over substance. You call get your man-crushes on these tough-talkers and don't really notice or seem to care what they do or what they say.
June 6, 2008 2:36 PM | Reply | Permalink