« McCain Campaign Attack On Alleged Iraq Flip-Flop By Obama Is A Stretch | Home | Obama Launches Two-Week Tour On The Economy »
Obama's Veep-Hunting Team Gears Up
The team tasked to find Obama the right veep swings into action:
Congressional sources tell NBC News that Obama's vice presidential vetting team of Jim Johnson, Caroline Kennedy, and Eric Holder will be on Capitol Hill Monday and Tuesday interviewing senators and members of Congress about their recommendations. Those being visited are NOT potential choices.The point, according to Senate offices, is to collect information about a potential field.
One interesting dimension to this: The question of how senators or Members of Congress will navigate pressure from their own constituents to advocate for making Hillary Veep, should there be any.
A CNN poll released today found that 54% of registered Dems think Obama should name her as Veep, while 43% opposed it. Sixty percent of Democratic women favored it.
Advertisement















FEINGOLD, FEINGOLD, FEINGOLD!!!!!
June 6, 2008 3:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
I would even give up my Senator!
June 6, 2008 3:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Count me among the 40% of Dem women who do not favor HRC as VP.
Obama can do better. If he wants her, ok. But not me!
June 6, 2008 3:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you sincerely for standing for reason and not thoughtless political correctness.
June 7, 2008 5:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
Too funny, we've had 10 or more posts about clinton being pushed as vp or polls show she should be vp or whatever about her being vp and you still have to slid in a couple of paragraphs about her being vp. We get it, we get it. Comeon gregg, are you married to a clinton relative or something?
June 6, 2008 3:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, just had to add that little blurb about Clinton at the end, didn't they? God forbid we have a VP thread without her on it....
And God forbid TPM not follow the mass media's obsession with this ridiculous idea.
June 6, 2008 3:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Comeon gregg, are you married to a clinton relative or something?
Geeze...no kidding. I'm beginning to wonder, too.
Seriously, this whole Hillary-needs-to-be-VP tripe is as tiring as it is insulting. Why are we acting as if there is no one else for him to select from? We have a lot of very talented people that can contribute.
Besides, the man said he's not going to be rushed nor will he be forced into a decision, so let it be. I don't care what the polls say.
According to the polls, he was supposed to lose.
June 6, 2008 3:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Goodness. There has not ever been the tiniest sign that Obama would consider Hillary as Vice President if his life depended on it. And logic rebels at the very idea.
And yet ever time we turn around, it is being brought up on this page by management. I obviously value this site, since I come her so often. But if it just joins the MSM pack and chases after every hope of sensationalism, it will lose its value. And, besides, there's enough annoyance in one's day without having to seek it out by logging on.
We also get the point that Greg values his connections within the Clinton camp. Instead of riding those into the sunset, however, the same energy could be welcoming the sunrise. There's a new sheriff in town, and there'll be a different posse.
June 6, 2008 5:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Let's see how those Hillary for Veep polls stand in like a week or two, shall we?
June 6, 2008 3:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Those being visited are NOT potential choices
Quite a few on the Hill are hoping right now they're not visited. I hope, the search team visits Hillary for her invaluable advice.
June 6, 2008 3:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Definitely!!!
June 6, 2008 3:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
I trust/hope they mean "not necessarily" or "for the most part not" possible choices. I'm sure they do mean that because some of the obvious people that they would want to talk to (e.g., chair of Senate Foreign Relations Committee) will also - I pray! - be being considered as a possible choice.
I'm willing to bet they clarify, because the whole exercise is to create a list ... and until it's created, how can you know who is on or off?
June 6, 2008 4:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
I trust/hope they mean "not necessarily" or "for the most part not" possible choices. I'm sure they do mean that because some of the obvious people that they would want to talk to (e.g., chair of Senate Foreign Relations Committee) will also - I pray! - be being considered as a possible choice.
I'm willing to bet they clarify, because the whole exercise is to create a list ... and until it's created, how can you know who is on or off?
June 6, 2008 4:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Greg Greg Greg -
Dude -that isn't right. Sixty percent of the Democratic women POLLED favored it.
That makes is sound like 60% of all of us favor it and that cannot be the case.
June 6, 2008 3:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, in Greg's defense, a poll is meant to represent the population being sampled.
June 6, 2008 4:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not to worry, TenaX. Obama has already made up his mind. The "committee" is dross. He has to have a committee pretend to make a search. That's how it's done. He met with Hillary. He made a deal with her then. She'll get something she wants that will placate her followers, likely a cabinet position that will let her pursue health reform. That too is how things are done. We will all be told what the deal is so that her supporters can relax. She will help deliver women. He needs somebody to help with the Appalachian creeps.
June 7, 2008 9:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Seriously, we're in General Election mode now. The question should be "Would you vote for an Obama/Clinton ticket?" and they should not just ask Democrats.
June 6, 2008 3:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good point and I bet the result won't be pretty.
June 6, 2008 3:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama's team is asking for input....another good move! They are going about this right and certainly are not responding to any pressure. They are just amazing!
June 6, 2008 3:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Feingold.
June 6, 2008 3:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not sure the position would interest him. From Wikipedia:
When the Hill asked him in that big Senate-wide interview, he said "If someone came up to me and said 'You're the guy', I'd have to consider it but I'd prefer to stay where I am."
I also feel like Obama's going to get more of a centrist. He's a Senator who's been around for a decently long time and has a good head on his shoulders though so I hope they at least consult him on their search.
June 6, 2008 3:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
There's no way that the results are X % of "registered Democrats." No way. They didn't poll me, for example.
I know it's a nitpick, but it really makes it sound like they polled all registered Democrats.
June 6, 2008 3:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
If you want to pick nits, the story said:
This statement is accurate.
June 6, 2008 3:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Every young voter with a cellphone, and not a land line like grandma, was not included. I can guarantee that.
June 6, 2008 3:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
True - but that's from the link, not the way Greg phrased it in the post. Greg just says: 60% of Democratic women favored it.
No, we don't. I didn't get polled.
If you don't like the nit I'm picking fine, but that's how it reads.
June 6, 2008 3:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Again, to pick nits (and nits upon nits), Greg did not say that according to the survey, 60% of Dem women want Clinton; just that the survey found that 60% of Dem women want Clinton. A finding can be right or wrong; it's just the finding of the survey. So I think the statement is still okay.
June 6, 2008 3:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm usually don't like to rag on TPM too much, but the last two days have been ridiculous. I understand this is all over CNN, etc. But why does TPM have to follow them lock and step. Next, thing ya know they'll be endorsing Sam Nunn for VP, if not Hillary, just like all the other clueless pundits on TV.
Though, thanks for the MN/Franken thread, TPM!
June 6, 2008 3:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, in Greg's defense, it's generally assumed that a sample doesn't include the entire population being sampled.
June 6, 2008 4:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry. Initial post upthread didn't appear to have made it at first.
June 6, 2008 4:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
CNN is so annoying.
June 6, 2008 3:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
So, Greg:
You have an Obama story here and you somehow spend most of the post writing your thoughts and relating this story to Hillary Clinton, then about the story itself.
And "introduction line" for the real story and then TWO paragraphs about Hillary as VP.
Another "interesting dimension", Greg, would be:
ALL THE OTHER POSSIBLE CANDIDATES FOR OBAMA TO CHOOSE FROM.
June 6, 2008 3:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, that'd be nice wouldn't it?
June 6, 2008 3:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
I personally don't think he is the best VP choice, but as the Hip Hop Junkie that I am - maybe they should give Wesley Clark a serious look. Granted, that opinion is completely based on this video clip.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCQZNMCbES0
June 6, 2008 3:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
I supported Clark when he ran for president, and I'd be happy if he were on the ticket. I think it's a long-shot though.
June 6, 2008 5:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Another "interesting dimension", Greg, would be:
WHO ARE THESE PEOPLE ON THE VP SELECTION COMMITTEE & WHAT DOES OBAMA CHOOSING THEM MEAN FOR HIS PROCESS?
June 6, 2008 3:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Caroline Kennedy is one of them. Not sure of the others.
June 6, 2008 3:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
"I" know about Kennedy, and I suspect why he chose her.
But others, including me, might not know or know that much about the other two.
June 6, 2008 3:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, that's be really informative and substantial wouldn't it??
June 6, 2008 3:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
That it would, if TPM didn't fall in with the herd mentality found in the mainstream media.
June 6, 2008 4:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm betting that Obama and his VP-Vetters won't be pushed into a decision by anyone. They'll do the numbers, sure, but my money is on the notion that he will choose someone who he really likes. Just seems like that kind of guy...
June 6, 2008 3:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Move on Greg... Move on...
You know as well as anyone... VOTERS don't vote for the VP -- it is up to the nominee...
You seem to be getting a little obsessed with her. Her campaign is over -- you really don't have to keep trolling for news on her behalf.
She's broke -- why don't you start looking into stories of those who haven't being paid - eh?
June 6, 2008 3:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Another "interesting dimension", Greg, would be:
NOT A SINGLE MENTION OF HILLARY CLINTON IN THE ACTUAL QUOTE.
June 6, 2008 3:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ok, who the hell did they poll, Frog Legs? If they polled all us registered Democratic women, how come they missed me?
This doesn't make any sense at all.
But whatever.
June 6, 2008 3:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
A poll is meaningless if they didn't poll ME !
June 6, 2008 3:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
No Mark that isn't what I said.
But fine points aren't your strong suit.
My point is that the results are reported baldly as X% of "Registered Democrats" which is not possible if they didn't poll all of us.
I don't give a shit about being polled. Try for once to get a subtle point - it's not that hard.
June 6, 2008 4:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
No Mark that isn't what I said.
But fine points aren't your strong suit.
My point is that the results are reported baldly as X% of "Registered Democrats" which is not possible if they didn't poll all of us. It makes it sound like they did.
June 6, 2008 4:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
I would not on any circumstance give Hillary Clinton the nomination.
She does not deserve it, and is the reason why the GOP are using her own negative words about Obama as their attack ads against him in this general election.
I also wasn't surprised about that TPM front story about the Clinton team attempting to unite a riff between Blacks and Jews. I had gotten a sense of this all throughout the debates. Like at the MSNBC debate she emphasized how it wasn't enough for Obama to denounce Louis Farrakhan's unwelcomed endorsement, or at the ABC debate how she brought up both Rev. Wright & Farrakhan's name.
She's acted like she's been completely unbeknown of Rev. Wright despite both her and Bill have shared White House meetings.
Obama be best to pick another female candidate to be his Vice President. The women will get over Hillary.
June 6, 2008 3:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
I meant veep, not nomination. :D
June 6, 2008 3:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Qualified candidates for Obama's Vice President besides HRC:
Reply and post one.
June 6, 2008 3:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Joe Biden
June 6, 2008 4:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Tim Kaine.
June 6, 2008 4:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Janet Napolitano
June 6, 2008 4:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Russ Feingold
June 6, 2008 4:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sen Feingold
June 6, 2008 4:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Janet Napolitano
June 6, 2008 4:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Schweitzer.
June 6, 2008 4:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Kathleen Sebelius
June 6, 2008 4:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
I second that.
June 6, 2008 10:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nancy Pelosi
June 6, 2008 4:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hello, Jim Webb! I've been trying to post this for 15 minutes. Who was obama campaigning with yesterday? First campaign stops of the general. Webb for VP.
June 6, 2008 4:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nancy Pelosi
June 6, 2008 4:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gov. Brad Henry (OK)
June 6, 2008 4:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bill Richardson
June 6, 2008 4:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Mark Warner (VA)
June 6, 2008 4:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Chuck Hagel.
June 6, 2008 5:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ok, I've seen his name thrown around a bit. I like hagel. He's against the war, which is good and he cares about our troops. However, the rest of his positions are sooooo far right it's not even funny. We all get on his bandwagon because of iraq; however, on social issues and the economy he is a dark ruby red republican. Don't need that or want that. Moderate republican, maybe, a water carrier for the far right no way.
June 6, 2008 5:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Jim Webb
June 6, 2008 5:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Did you hear obama's introduction for webb yesterday? It sounded like obama was selling him for vp. What a great ticket! They compliment each other big time.
June 6, 2008 5:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Totally. Luved it. There's something there. My first reaction was, HRC is so not going to be offered the Veep.
Neither will loyalties alone decide his choice. Rather, I sensed in that speech, that in his mind, it is about strengthening the ticket and more importantly, having someone who would continue to see through, the change that he is galvanizing in the American collective memory. Webb as Veep, sure seems like a good fit.
June 6, 2008 5:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Looks like he's a shoe-in, by getting the most votes in this 'poll'. :)
June 6, 2008 5:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bob Wexler
June 6, 2008 5:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Doesn't he like cocaine and prostitutes (at the same time)? ;)
June 6, 2008 6:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Your point?
;-)
June 6, 2008 9:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Russ Feingold.
June 6, 2008 7:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dan Inouye
June 6, 2008 9:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Mark Warner If a good candidate is available to take his place in his run for the Senate.
June 7, 2008 4:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Johnson, Holder, and Kennedy are not "the team tasked to find Obama the right veep."
They comprise the 3-member leadership team for the larger VP selection committee.
The list of those who are serving on the whole committee -- a list which likely includes names like Tom Daschle, Valerie Jarrett, and Steve Hildebrand -- has yet to be published.
June 6, 2008 4:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Feingold, Mark Warner, or Max Cleland
June 6, 2008 4:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Kathleen Sebelius or Tim Kaine.
Oh, and btw: Skee-Phi!
June 6, 2008 5:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Max Cleland? That's a real intriguing one. Sounds VERY interesting.
June 6, 2008 6:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
feingold and boxer. also, I like myself!
June 6, 2008 4:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
all this talk of Clinton for VP is just silliness
whatever her merits, there's all the negative baggage that goes along with her, and Obama just ain't gonna chose her. Impossible (as much as "impossibility" is a possibility in this world)
p.s. I have to say I'm amused that for all those uber-Clintonistas out there pushing this ridiculous scenario it's now ok to latch the Clinton wagon to Obama when for months he was the distinctly "inferior" candidate. But hey, if it helps them reconcile themselves to Obama, that's ok. I do wish that they wouldn't make such a show of it. Just another part of the never-ending drama that always attends the Clintons ...
June 6, 2008 4:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Its just dawned on me what Hillary has become to Barack Obama as he can't seem to shrug her off so easily. Hillary has become a nugget and despite Obama's efforts to get rid of her, she keeps coming back to the surface with each fervent freight grabbing the attention.
June 6, 2008 4:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary as Veep - Ain't gonna happen.
....
Superdelegate says Clinton campaign used 'divisive tactics'
by Josh Margolin/The Star-Ledger
Rep. Rob Andrews, who supported Hillary Clinton throughout the primary season, disclosed he received a phone call shortly before the April 22 Pennsylvania primary from a top member of Clinton's organization and that the caller explicitly discussed a strategy of winning Jewish voters by exploiting tensions between Jews and African-Americans.
"There have been signals coming out of the Clinton campaign that have racial overtones that indeed disturb me," Andrews said at his campaign headquarters in Cherry Hill Tuesday night after he lost his bid for the U.S. Senate nomination. "Frankly, I had a private conversation with a high-ranking person in the campaign ... that used a racial line of argument that I found very disconcerting. It was extremely disconcerting given the rank of this person. It was very disturbing."
Andrews said the phone call came after he angered the Clinton camp by making some positive comments about Obama. He would not disclose the caller's name because of the private nature of the conversation.
http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2008/06/superdelegate_says_clinton_cam.html
June 6, 2008 4:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
So why did he support her and only reveal this fact now that she won't be President and able to reward him?
June 6, 2008 5:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
damn...I forgot to propose tena!
June 6, 2008 4:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
O god no!
You think Bill can't survive the vetting process? You don't really know me.
No fracking way. LOL
June 6, 2008 4:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
TODAY from the Obama Campaign:
If you make a $25 donation today, your gift will be matched by a previous donor who has agreed to give again. You can even choose to exchange a note with them about why you support Barack.
http://my.barackobama.com/page/m/7c2cbfe97a199bfc/7WOFap/VEsE/
June 6, 2008 4:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
No Mark that isn't what I said.
But fine points aren't your strong suit.
My point is that the results are reported baldly as X% of "Registered Democrats" which is not possible if they didn't poll all of us.
June 6, 2008 4:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Triple post foul!!!
You now owe the Obama campaign $3 million!
We'll find enough folks to make it legal.
;-)
June 6, 2008 9:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Remember all those spring 2007 name-recognition polls, asking Democrats who they wanted to be the nominee, when the candidates had barely started campaigning.
That's how much this shitty CNN/Vin Gupta poll is worth.
Of course, they're going to say Hillary Clinton for VP. That's who they know best -- not least, because the MSM has been pushing her down their throat forever. They knew her best in spring 2007, too, and, granted, that got her pretty far. But it didn't get her the nomination.
Honestly -- how many randomly canvassed Democrats do you think have even heard of Kathleen Sebelius or Brian Schweitzer, or Sherrod Brown, much less are in a position to judge whether one of those often-mentioned names might be a better match for Obama and thus a better VP for the country?
Shame on you for even mentioning this shitty poll.
June 6, 2008 4:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Jim Webb
June 6, 2008 4:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
No. He has ghastly gender problems. I don't like HRC much, but I don't think that anyone should be picked for VP who would be an explicit f-you to her more fervent followers, and Webb would.
June 8, 2008 6:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Remember all those spring 2007 name-recognition polls, asking Democrats who they wanted to be the nominee, when the candidates had barely started campaigning.
That's how much this shitty CNN/Vin Gupta poll is worth.
Of course, they're going to say Hillary Clinton for VP. That's who they know best -- not least, because the MSM has been pushing her down their throat forever. They knew her best in spring 2007, too, and, granted, that got her pretty far. But it didn't get her the nomination.
Honestly -- how many randomly canvassed Democrats do you think have even heard of Kathleen Sebelius or Brian Schweitzer, or Sherrod Brown, much less are in a position to judge whether one of those often-mentioned names might be a better match for Obama and thus a better VP for the country?
Shame on you for even mentioning this shitty poll.
June 6, 2008 4:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Word, lumea.
It is a shitty poll and a stupid one.
June 6, 2008 4:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
What in the hell just happened with comments?
The server dropped the connection 6 times, but the comment posted 3 times?
Whoa!
June 6, 2008 4:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, too many people posting at once me thinks. Every body wants to drop a name, any name, for VP besides Hillary.
June 6, 2008 4:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm tired of all the Hillary obsession by TPM today.
Hillary, Hillary, Hillary the VP?, Hillary, Hillary, Hillary, Obama, Hillary.
Just shut up about Hillary already. Let's move on.
June 6, 2008 4:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Anybody
But
Hillary
June 6, 2008 4:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Anybody
But
Hillary
June 6, 2008 4:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm tired of all the Hillary obsession by TPM today.
Hillary, Hillary, Hillary the VP?, Hillary, Hillary, Hillary, Obama, Hillary.
Just shut up about Hillary already. Let's move on.
June 6, 2008 4:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Which is the #1 reason that she should not be VP. Her and Bill would be in the news 24/7 leaving the POTUS a few seconds at the end of each news cycle pretty much as an afterthought.
June 6, 2008 10:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
I really don't care who Obama picks - I don't. As long as it isn't Hillary or a Republican, I'm good.
I trust his judgment.
June 6, 2008 4:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think everyone here would agree with you on that. I like to drop Feingold and others any chance I get to prove their are other candidates out there. And who know's? Maybe Caroline Kennedy checks TPM out every once in while. Who's to say?
June 6, 2008 4:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Feingold is the very best choice, IMO, but he may be perceived as too liberal.
June 6, 2008 5:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
You speak great wisdom, fellow traveller! About being too liberal, that is.
June 7, 2008 5:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
I love Feingold, but a Black and a Jew on the same ticket? Not sure how that would play.
June 7, 2008 4:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
What's wrong with that?
June 8, 2008 11:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
I trust/hope they mean "not necessarily" or "for the most part not" possible choices. I'm sure they do mean that because some of the obvious people that they would want to talk to (e.g., chair of Senate Foreign Relations Committee) will also - I pray! - be being considered as a possible choice.
I'm willing to bet they clarify, because the whole exercise is to create a list ... and until it's created, how can you know who is on or off?
June 6, 2008 4:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
You know, if these Hillary supporters had any sense at all, since Hillary won't be president, they would want her in the Senate.
She can do alot more for women and the working class as a senior, high-profile legislator on their behalf, rather than stuck in a largely ceremonial position suborindate to someone who justifiably doesn't trust her to keep his administration's priorities her own.
Hopefully, as she fades from the spotlight, people's perspectives will align with common sense, and this Hillary for VP idea will go gently into that good night.
June 6, 2008 4:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm pulling for a darkhorse.
Wexler.
Jewish Floridian who has been an outstanding supporter and surrogate and is just a damned smart guy!
Probably won't happen, but, hey, I can dream!
June 6, 2008 4:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
I actually like that idea.
June 6, 2008 4:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
A friend of mine mentioned that to me the other day -it might really be a good combination!!
June 6, 2008 5:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think Wexler has national (read: Presidential) potential, but I would be shocked -- happily so! -- if Obama tapped as a running mate.
But, like I said, I can dream.
If he does pick Bob, Obama takes Florida for sure.
June 6, 2008 5:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
But Wexler likes cocaine and hookers. They're fun!
June 6, 2008 5:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Colbert (or was it Stewart) much?
June 6, 2008 5:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hagel
Webb
Biden
In no paticular order. Each has specific strengths that would enhance (a lot) areas where the GOP will hit Barak with, and (more importantly) the cooperative leadership for the next eight years will be inspiring.
You know what kind of shit they are going to have to clean-up ???!!! This will be a long, tough haul these first couple of years. But, the results are gonna blow us all away ! ( in a real, real good way !! )
June 6, 2008 4:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm pulling for a darkhorse.
Wexler.
Jewish Floridian who has been an outstanding supporter and surrogate and is just a damned smart guy!
Probably won't happen, but, hey, I can dream!
June 6, 2008 4:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
I like Wexler alot, may be a bit green, but who's too say?
June 6, 2008 4:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
You know, if these Hillary supporters had any sense at all, since Hillary won't be president, they would want her in the Senate.
She can do alot more for women and the working class as a senior, high-profile legislator on their behalf, rather than stuck in a largely ceremonial position suborindate to someone who justifiably doesn't trust her to keep his administration's priorities her own.
Hopefully, as she fades from the spotlight, people's perspectives will align with common sense, and this Hillary for VP idea will go gently into that good night.
June 6, 2008 4:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
With the news that a top member of Clinton's organization explicitly discussed a strategy of winning Jewish voters by exploiting tensions between Jews and African-American, with N.J. Rep. Andrews, Hillary is no more likely to be named to the VP slot, than I am.
.....
Superdelegate says Clinton campaign used 'divisive tactics'
by Josh Margolin/The Star-Ledger
Rep. Rob Andrews, who supported Hillary Clinton throughout the primary season, disclosed he received a phone call shortly before the April 22 Pennsylvania primary from a top member of Clinton's organization and that the caller explicitly discussed a strategy of winning Jewish voters by exploiting tensions between Jews and African-Americans.
"There have been signals coming out of the Clinton campaign that have racial overtones that indeed disturb me," Andrews said at his campaign headquarters in Cherry Hill Tuesday night after he lost his bid for the U.S. Senate nomination. "Frankly, I had a private conversation with a high-ranking person in the campaign ... that used a racial line of argument that I found very disconcerting. It was extremely disconcerting given the rank of this person. It was very disturbing."
Andrews said the phone call came after he angered the Clinton camp by making some positive comments about Obama. He would not disclose the caller's name because of the private nature of the conversation.
http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2008/06/superdelegate_says_clinton_cam.html
June 6, 2008 4:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Agrippina,
This combined with the calls received by James Clyburn's office says a lot, for sure.
June 6, 2008 4:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Biden, Webb or Hagel - in no paticular order.
Each one brings strength to areas in which the GOP will try and hit Barak with. And, more importantly, I do think we need a VP with a little "kick-ass" mentality. Barak needs to stay gracious, firm, thoughtful, determined,etc. - ALL the things that has got him to where he is now (and where WE are now) - but, his admin. is going to have A LOT of shit to clean-up - and his/our VP should be the "muscle" of President Obama's directives. But, not like in a Tony Soprano kind of way.............(well...w/ Rove and Cheney - i dunno, maybe )
OBAMA 08
June 6, 2008 4:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Chuck Hagel could be a good choice. He is very critical of McBushSame
Several governors: Schweitzer, Kaine, Sebelius, Richardson, Rendell, Ohio governor.
Other: Sam Nunn, Tim Webb, john Edwards,
Military: Wes Clark
Independent: Bloomberg -
I hope so that the media will give it a rest for now. I am sure Senator Obama will make the right decision in due time.
June 6, 2008 4:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
God, no to school prayer endorsing, anti-gay, Dixiecrat Nunn.
Only Washington pundits, who live and breathe Washington DC, think he's a good choice.
Groadderton 5000!
June 6, 2008 5:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
If we're looking at old news, how about George Mitchell?
If he can figure out the steroids issue in baseball, he still has a brain in him.
June 6, 2008 6:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
I really can't believe we're talking about Chuck Hagel as a possible VP candidate on a progressive blog. Hagel is a deep, deep red Republican with some seriously Stone Age positions; I do *not* want him a heartbeat from the presidency. Nunn is actually much, much better on the issues that matter than Hagel, who really only has his opposition to the war and general badass persona to add to an Obama administration.
I'd much prefer a reformed Republican, like Webb (well, I guess deformed-reformed Dem-Rep-Dem, but whatever). Sadly, I think he may not be in the cards because of the perceived ticking-off-militant-Hillary-follower-putative-feminists issue.
June 6, 2008 7:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Anybody but the Clintons. Yes, they will come as a team and to deny it is just silly.
Feinstein, Davis, et al, need to get a grip and shut the hell up. Their constant pushing of Hillary is just going to result in more bad blood when Obama (wisely) picks a much more stable, qualified, helpful someone else.
June 6, 2008 4:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
There's no way he picks her. Please, TPM - let the dream die.
June 6, 2008 5:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm shocked that none of you have mentioned the obvious choice: Geraldine Ferraro.
June 6, 2008 5:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's because she's dead.
Charles Barkley says so!
June 6, 2008 5:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey Dirk, this is OT but did you happen to see your manly mug plastered on the google news front page a couple days back? Under the POLITICS sub-heading, your TPM avatar was placed next to something Obama-related for, oh, a good 36 hours or so.
I meant to post about it separately, but here ya go. Bravo!
June 6, 2008 7:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh please, NO. This on the CNN website just now.
iReporter David Dunmeyer of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, believes Clinton is the "only choice" for the vice presidential nomination and is willing to vote for McCain if she is not on the Democratic ticket.
Wayne Phillips of Concord, California, is really against the idea of an Obama-Clinton ticket as well. "Hillary may be competent, but we can all agree that she would not be loyal to President Obama." So who would Phillips like to see instead? "Here's a hint. Vice President Webb," he said, referring to Virginia Sen. Jim Webb.
WAS Hillary EVER going to get behind Obama?
Unlikely - not when she can whip her loyalist into another frenzy of self-serving stewardship and full-out blackmail? But now we are all sure that Hillary doesn't have a problem with that comment, doesn't mind it ONE BIT. Hillary will take all the Harold Ickes she can get, NO Party Unity EVER need apply. Hillary doesn't care about the Democratic Party and is quite willing burn it if she for her own self-serving purposes.
Picking Hillary really isn't "Change You Can Believe In." How do you like them apples Obama? Because I don't, I don't like it one bit.
I think I'm warming up to Senator Webb now. Just not another self-serving congresswoman who is everybit as self-centered as Bush and Cheney ever were. I've had enough of that kind of politican.
June 6, 2008 7:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
No chance with Webb. Hillary's rallying all second-wave feminists and Obama having to bring them back into the fold means Webb is a no-go. I believe most of these Clinton supporters will come around when they take a good look at John McCain and his policies, however picking Senator Webb as VP would really be rubbing salt in their wounds.
I guess one theory would be that these women would just not vote, whereas with Webb you could steal away McCain voters (making it a double whammy of sorts, one less for him and one more for you sorta deal).
In reality though, it won't be Webb. Hillary made sure of that. He's probably better off left in the Senate and maybe campaigning for Obama in small doses in strategic areas.
June 6, 2008 8:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
How about any Democrat of standing, male/female no previous scandals or lapse of memory; that is a team player.
June 6, 2008 9:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Feingold.
June 7, 2008 1:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
Obama needs a working-class, Jewish Latina over 60, with executive and military experience.
June 8, 2008 11:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
Al Gore.
For one thing, he would be quite cheerful about cutting the Imperial Vice-Presidency down to size so that he could concentrate on climate change issues. He'll never get a better soapbox than a very high but largely ceremonial official position.
June 8, 2008 6:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Lumea says: "Of course, they're going to say Hillary Clinton for VP. That's who they know best -- not least, because the MSM has been pushing her down their throat forever."
right on - just what I was thinking. Name recognition is the only thing the average non-political junkie has to go on at this point. Just like before the Primary voting started, when Hillary had the lead in the polls:
"Oh Yeah, Clinton - that sounds familiar."
"Biden - who's he?"
Someone named Obama? You got to be kidding!"
June 8, 2008 8:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Just checking to see if my avatar is up
June 8, 2008 9:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
His name hasn't been mentioned, but I would like to see Bob Kerrey as VP. If not him, then Sam Nunn or Jim Webb on the ticket. I am not a Democrat or a Republican but one of those would pull me to vote that way.
June 9, 2008 7:17 PM | Reply | Permalink