Potential Veeps.

Email Print posted by bradyjames 06/27/2008 02:46:35 AM EST

Google Technorati del.icio.us digg reddit
I've decided to write a blog about potential vice presidental candidates. 

The Vice President.  The easiest job ever. 

"You mean my only real responsibility is to break ties in the Senate?  Fuck yes!" 

 So, lets talk about potential veeps.  There will be no mention of Hillary Clinton.  Other then that.  And other then that one, saying that there would be no more talk about Hillary Clinton.

 

Dems:

Bill Richardson (Gov. of New Mexico)

Pros: Forgien policy experience.  Part of the Clinton administartion.  Very popular in New Mexico, which is a swing state.

Cons: Two minorities on one ticket?  I don't know about that.

Kathleen Sebulius (Gov. of Kansas)

Pro: Being a woman could bring on a shit ton of Hillary supporters.  From Arizona, a Republican stronghold.

Con: Who?

Janet Naplatino (Gov. of Arizona) 

Pro: Being a woman could bring on a shit ton of Hillary supporters.  From Kansas, a Republican stronghold.

Con: Who?

Gen. Wesley Clark (former Allied Commander)

Pro: Trumps McCain on matters of national security.  Is older.  Whiter.  Has the military expierence that many people bitch about Obama not having.  You can't really questions someones patiotism with a General in their corner.  Popular.  Well known.  Trusted.

Con: N/A.

GOP.

Mike Huckabee (Gov. of Arkansas)

Pro: Evangilical.  Would bring the Christian right to McCain. 

Con: His joke about Obama getting shot left a bad taste in the mouths of Independents, who, in the end decide this race.

Mitt Romney (former Gov. of Massachusetts)

Pro: One of the most conservative politicians since Regan.  Would bring the far right to McCain's side.

Con:  I guarantee, that there is some weird sex stuff going on in his life.  I mean, seriously. Look at his face.

Rudy Guilianni (former New York City mayor)

Pro: 9/11. 9/11. 9/11. 9/11. 9/11. 9/11. 9/11.  Might be able to help carry New York

Con: All he fucking talks about is 9/11, and its depressing as fuck.  Not conservative enough for most Republicans..... 9/11.

Tim Pawlenty (Gov. of Minnesota)

Pro: Very popular in Minnesota.  Young.  Fresh to the party.

Con: As bad of a speaker as John McCain.  Close ties to President Bush.

 

Now, if I were the candidates, I would pick Clark and Romney, respectivally.  If you feel I missed anyone, please, let me know.  And let me know who you would pick.  Lets get come discussion! 

< Is there a hole in the FISA bill? | Young Turks Get Featured on YouTube >
 Display:
Potential Veeps. | 22 comments (22 topical, 0 hidden)
some others (none / 0)
I would also love to see Barbara Boxer (would be called too liberal) or Barney Frank (NO way in hell, he's gay) on the ticket

candidates I also love who have a shot:
- Wesley Clark, it's Supreme Commanders btw
- Feingold
- Bloomberg, life long Democrat (he only run as Republican because too much competition on Dem ticket), very effective, get's things done, more progressive than most Dems, rich enough that he doesn't need to take money from anyone (read about him on http://www.time.com/time/na tion/article/0,8599,1632736 ,00.html)
- last but NOT least Max Cleland, a genuine war hero, from the South, fights back, if the Repugs turn their smear machine on a national level on a parapalegic, every independent will finally realize how sick they are and it will rally Dems to fight harder + Max will fight back

by callisto on 06/27/2008 05:45:46 AM EST

Good Breakdown (none / 0)
I would only say that Wes Clark must have at least ONE con.

The only thing I can think of is that he's made some not-so-nice comments about Obama, during the primary season.  That could be used against Obama.

by ihavenobias on 06/27/2008 11:56:26 AM EST

I can think of a few other knocks on Clark... (none / 0)
1. He has no civilian political experience. He's a made for Cable News Celeb with absolutely zero record for political office. Being a General doesn't automatically maker you fit for public consumption! 2. He is too closely tied to the military "complex" for many liberals comforts. You don't get to be Supreme Commander of ANYTHING without some major influence peddling or by other "means". Many voters arer at least wary of military "leadership" for this reason, and rightfully so. 3. He has as of yet expressed zero interest for the job. If he were a congressman or something, we would expect this but he is an outsider almost completely - where is his campaign? I know you guys have a thing for Clark because of Wes Jr., and I know that the General is a fine upstanding man and patriot, but honestly I can't see 2 political rookies on the ticket making any sense. I would be very surprised to see this combo happen! :)

by bobo1 on 06/27/2008 12:20:17 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Holy Shit!!!!!!!!! (none / 0)
I agree with bobo.

by ProfRich on 06/27/2008 12:33:25 PM EST

[ Parent ]
I don't (none / 0)

First of all, it sounds like he's describing Eisenhower. Is that a bad thing? Americans like the Wes Clarks of the world (and there's not a lot of em). Second, bobo thinks Obama is a political "rookie". Really. You're gonna go with that? He's a lot of things but based on his performance in the primary I'm gonna call him a pro. I would hold that opinion even if I was a McCain supporter.

by hazmat on 06/27/2008 12:48:04 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Keep your panties on hazmat... (none / 0)
Both of these men are still relative newcomers in the realm of national politics. Hence the term rookies - that's not to dispell their accomplishments, I'm just stating fact. Secondly, PLEASE do not make me go into comparing the accomplishments of Generals Eisenhower and Clark - it won't be pretty, hazmat, and out of respect for General Clark, I don't think he really expects to be remembered as if he were Eisenhower. That's like comparing high school baseball to the Major Leagues. Thanks again for your comments... :)

by bobo1 on 06/27/2008 12:56:21 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Who is posting this? (none / 0)
And what have you done with bobo?

by ProfRich on 06/27/2008 01:53:36 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Nope, it's bobo. (none / 0)
You will know him by the trail of ellipses...

by Spencer on 06/27/2008 03:34:54 PM EST

[ Parent ]
I was fooled too (none / 0)
Someone has taken bobo's computer and is posting under his name.  This person is almost rational and cool-headed enough to have a discussion with.

by desertpear on 06/27/2008 08:30:48 PM EST

[ Parent ]
true but you balance that with (none / 0)
1. Americans love an outsider, people like Bloomberg, Romney, Schwartzenegger, ... had no civilian political experience either
if Clark keeps beating up on Repugs like he's been doing lately, I do think people will eat him up

2. how many times does the Democratic Party listen to it's true liberal wing?

haven't all the pundits been saying he needs a more conservative counterweight?

being a former NATO Supreme Commander, Clark has a ton of political experience, working together with the different governments in NATO, you think being involved in the complexity of the Balcan war at that level, doesn't give you a ton of political and diplomatic experience?

Clark never advocates violence as a first resort, so what he says will not offend the "liberals", his attacks on the Repugs will/already has made them love him

3. if you express interest, you've lost the job + don't you think attacking McCain so heavily lately is his application

I have loved Clark, since 2004, before I even knew he had a son :) His foreign policy was/is one of the most thought true in the Democratic Party, it was even in 2004 a refreshing voice compared to the insanity of Bushco.

Bobo, I think your points are valid, but I think that there are reasons that can balance them out.

by callisto on 06/27/2008 02:39:15 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Just to be clear (none / 0)

I see this side of the Clark debate too.  I just thought bobo made some astonishingly lucid and valid points and wanted to acknowledge that. 

Kinda how I stay up late for those once in a life eclipses.

by ProfRich on 06/27/2008 02:50:06 PM EST

[ Parent ]
100% correct, 0% wrong (none / 0)
I agree, that's why I made sure to add

"Bobo, I think your points are valid"

:) strange days

by callisto on 06/27/2008 03:01:04 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Thank you Callisto... (none / 0)
I agree that "outsiders" can have distinct advantages in political races - I would say that this ticket already has its outsider in Senator Obama, though, and its a bit risky to add another to the mix... I would also argue that Schwarzenegger was surely not an outsider - he is a celebrity and that carries its own issues. As to point #2, I would say that in selecting Obama, the Democrats have listened to the left wing of the party (instead of selecting the more centrist DLC type Clinton). So you are probably right in saying that a shift to the right might be in order to balance the ticket. I would certainly not deny that General Clark has plenty of military expertise and some diplomatic ties, but that doesn't necessarily translate into civilian knowledge and usefulness - the military is its own system with its own way of doing things. The Balkans conflict was a cakewalk compared to Eisewnhowers experience during WWII. Thanks again for your time... :)

by bobo1 on 06/27/2008 06:05:06 PM EST

[ Parent ]
true, but (none / 0)
they could run as "not-tainted-by-Washin ton-politics-ticket", I don't think having 2 outsiders on the ticket is enough to sink the ticket + the "safe"-choices haven't worked out for the Dems these last years
of course these are points of view, that might only be prooven or disprooven after the events, probably we'll never know :)

"the Democrats have listened to the left wing of the party (instead of selecting the more centrist DLC type Clinton)"

true the left wing tended to support Obama, again making crystal clear that it's so much about image and so little about substance, they're both centrists, Obama isn't DLC, because he hasn't alligned himself with them

on the issues both have almost the same stances, on health care Hillary is actually to the left of Obama (and I prefer her plan), on other issues he's slighty to the left of Hillary

BUT they are not progressives and/or leftwing and/or very liberal, the most progressive aspects about them is their skin color or sexe

and Obama keeps prooving it, he's more liberal than Republicans, but he isn't a true liberal: not on economy, civil rights, foreign trade, the environment, ...

especially on civil rights, he's as DLC as it gets, his speeches give you hope, but nothing he does reinforces that

I love Gravel, but I understand he can't get elected in the US, so I'm nothing asking that, but at least meet me in the middle, why can't he be closer to Feingold, Gore, Dean, Bloomberg, Boxer

by callisto on 06/27/2008 09:13:43 PM EST

[ Parent ]
I think (none / 0)
Bobo thinks Obama is ultra left-wing because he is black. 

by desertpear on 06/27/2008 09:22:57 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Scratch Janet (none / 0)
Rumor is she's a Lezbo and wont' want to the spotlight of the campaign placed on her personal life.  Even if she's not, she looks too much like another democratic Janet (Reno).  Add to the fact that she won't be able to deliver her own state its just a bad idea.  She will probably get a cabinet position if he wins however.

http://www.phoenixnewtimes. com/2006-11-02/news/reality -check/

by alphasigmookie on 06/27/2008 05:01:22 PM EST

Alpha - how can you think that!!! (none / 0)
I'm just playin man - she is so obviously a Lesbian that it amuses me that Dems would consider her a viable choice. Even the liberals here would have to think twice about her selection... I agree she'll get a cabinet position - hopefully not Homeland Security in charge of the borders!!! :)

by bobo1 on 06/27/2008 05:44:15 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Bill Richardson (none / 0)

I wanted to support Richardson, but he totally bombed in some of the debates, making me think he doesn't have what it takes to help Obama win. 

I think bobo did make some good points about Wes Clark (gasp), but he is sort of a celebrity military guy.  I really like him.  You forgot another point against Wes though--his son's appearance on this wacky lib site would be splashed all over the media. 

Add to Guiliani's cons that he likes to dress up like a woman.  

by desertpear on 06/27/2008 08:36:15 PM EST

Maybe having (none / 0)
TYT splashed all over the media wouldn't be so bad.  It might cost us an election, but think of all the new viewers!

by Spencer on 06/27/2008 10:41:20 PM EST

[ Parent ]
I know! (none / 0)
Cenk would become a celebrity!!  and then Bill O'Reilly's crew would be stalking him.

by desertpear on 06/27/2008 11:24:53 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Wesley Clark (none / 0)
I still think that Weley Clark will be the candidate.  McCain hits Obama on national security more then anything else.  I just think that having a General on the ticket is going to bring in a shitload of votes, and having a general as the VP is going to do nothing but bring repect to an Obama administration.  He's the motherfucking man.

by bradyjames on 06/27/2008 11:04:37 PM EST

I hope you are right (none / 0)
I am anxious to know!!!

by desertpear on 06/27/2008 11:25:24 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Potential Veeps. | 22 comments (22 topical, 0 hidden)
 Display: