I’m thinking more of a state that Bob Dole won by one point in 1996. And I think Sam Nunn still carries a great deal of support among Georgians.
Richardson has too many skeletons in his closet. I like Richardson and I think he’ll have a high ranking job in the Obama presidency if it happens, but I don’t see him as vice president.
Nunn would be a good choice, except he might be a bit on the old side for the Dems 8 years from now. He’s only 2 years younger than McCain. It really helps the party to pick someone how can carry things on after the current president is ineligible to run.
Hell, just ask the other Clinton. You know, Bill.
Or why not GHWB? 
I just can’t say enough how great I think a Obama/Sebelius ticket would be.
Her persona, her record, and her demographics/region compliment Obama like no other candidate. With the economy likely being the defining issue of the election, I think it is important to have a Governor in that spot; someone with Executive domestic policy experience and who has successfully ran a real budget. Also, when the issue of healthcare comes up, as it will, she was an Insurance Commissioner who fought and beat the insurance industry’s conglomeration attempts. And she did this all(she was also a State Rep), like Obama, cleanly by refusing to take any contributions from insurers.
As far as the vetting process goes for Sebelius, the biggest criticism among Dems is that she didn’t have enough “bite” in her SotU rebuttal. I counter that it was not what was called for. She connected where she needed- moderates and right-leaners. She also was likable enough that the only attacks to be waged back would be on policies; as Barack says- ‘that is a debate they welcome’. If you saw Brit Hume’s face afterwards you knew she did the job. Plus, just look at Obama v Clinton, the “fighting” is counter productive.
The only “dirt” that has been turned up on Kathleen Sebelius is that her son made a GTA-esque video game about prison life called ‘Dont Drop the Soap’. If that is all they have on her we should be so lucky; sure as hell beats a revisit to Bill’s infidelity. It is not a big enough deal to be a vote breaker, and could in fact serve as an opportunity to introduce her in the favorable light as a, perhaps disappointed, but ever-loving mother. Her only negative could easily be flipped into a benefit.
As far as the foreign policy/security issue goes, I like what Bill Richardson said on Larry King last night- that Obama should announce his intended foreign policy team early, SecState, Defense, FP Advisor. He could announce them now and have them start campaigning together as a team, which would also free up the issue so he is able to pick whoever he wants for VP. Imagine this line up touring the Country and the Sunday talk shows…
FP Advisor- Sam Nunn
SecState- Bill Richardson
SecDefense- Chuck Hagel
SecHomelandSecurity- Thad Allen
…it’d be like the GlobeTrotters of foreign policy.
I think Richardson is a lock as SecState, but I’m sure somewhere a place could be found for a Clark, Sestak, Powell, etc… I intentionally excluded Biden and Webb as I think we really need them in the Senate.
Obama is really in a good place to be. Aside from just facing a losing Republican ‘brand’, it is amazing how deep the talent pool he has to choose from is; not just for VP but for his entire cabinet. Just compare the initial Presidential Candidate line-ups of the two parties.
The best thing that could happen would be an arrangement where Obama offers the spot to Hillary who turns it down. Obviously this has to be carefully planned, and she has to really support the ticket. Usually you wouldn’t announce a VP as your second choice, but given this race, I don’t think it would be considered a slight.
Biden has stuck his foot in his mouth many times in campaigns, so I think he is out.
I think Richardson would be an excellent choice. Besides the advantages already cited, he might implicitly raise the immigration issue. Since McCain actually has a decent position on this, it will either force him to flip-flop, and piss off the independents, or stay the course, and piss off the anti-immigration Republican base. But that is minor.
I like Schweitzer very much, but I don’t think he will get picked. I would go for Sibelius over Richardson.
This could just as easily be the worst of both worlds: on the one hand it’d lead to days of media speculation about why she turned the job down, if she doesn’t believe he can win, if she plans to help, if she’s prepping for a 2012 run already. And on the other, the Republicans would be able to say Obama wanted her as VP.
One thing people need to keep in mind is that Obama can’t simply gut the Democratic party’s positioning. Everyone is lining up Senators, Congressmen and Governors for Obama’s cabinet, but the party wants to maintain it’s positioning in important posts. Richardson and Edwards are both well positioned for that. Richardson can’t run for Re-election and Edwards is not currently holding office.
I agree, I really hate seeing other Senators pop up in the convo.
Just another plus for Sebelius, since she is term limited to 2010.
Napolitano too, is term limited. I kind of like her for AG, if not Edwards, but I have also read that she might go after McCain’s Senate seat. If anyone can take that from him it would be her.
If Richardson is picked for SecState and Edwards for AG (just speculating, of course), picking Sibelius might be good choice, assuming her Lieutenant Governor, Mark Parkinson, takes over and can hold on to the spot for the Dems at the state level in 2010 in a heavily Republican state.
tds1273’s scenario might dovetail somewhat with the above also.
It’s obvious who Obama should pick - Cecil Adams! Together they ride to the White House on The Straight Dope Express!!!
Ron Paul
I heard speculation about Bob Graham the other day on NPR (he said he’d consider it if asked).
Graham is from Florida, a crucial swing state, where he was both a Governor and a Senator. He’s got extensive foreign policy experience, and he opposed the Iraq war from the beginning.
His biggest drawback is his age - he’s 71, IIRC. But, that still makes him younger than McCain, and it means that Obama has effectively neutralized the “experience” factor that McCain brings to the table.
FWIW, Sebelius’ ties to Ohio are pretty slim and attenuated. Gilligan has no current presence in Ohio, hasn’t been governor since the early 1970s and was defeated pretty soundly after only 1 term.
Current Ohio governor and former congressman Strickland wouln’t be a bad choice. I wonder if Al Gore would be interested in reprising his role as VP. He’s got the experience!
James Jones? Never heard of him (that may likely change):
Am I a bad person for laughing at this reason why Hillary won’t be the veep?
I’m not getting one argument in particular about why he MUST choose Hillary: because she got almost as many votes as he did, almost the same number of delelgates, was the clear second choice of primary particpants, etc.
I actually heard Jerry Springer making this argument (on a “serious” TV show, not his own–I think it was Dan Abrams’ show) last night, and I’ve heard other Hillaryites making it as well, that it would be a historically unprecedented insult NOT to offer the VP slot to your closest rival for the nomination.
Struck me as yet another case of Clinton moving the goalposts to a point on the field closest to her position: did Mondale HAVE to offer the VP slot to Gary Hart in '84 or risk insulting him? Of course not, and Hart’s people never argued that he needed to. Did Humphrey HAVE to offer his VP slot to McCarthy? Woulda been a good get if he could have done it, but everyone knew that wasn’t a good mix and it wasn’t considered, as far as I can remember. Even when Jesse was making the case that he HAD to be considered for VP in 1988 (I think that was what he claimed), people just ridiculed the deluded egotist for that ludicrous position. Of course Dukakis was going to choose anyone BUT Jesse.
When you’ve got Jerry Springer as your spokesperson, you’ve obviously got a lot of problems anyway, but he was coming from a place I’ve seen before: that Hillary has earned the VP slot. Seems to me that her people have a very funny definition of “earned”–she’s lost the VP slot, by my standards, by engaging in a scorched earth campaign, designed to trash Obama’s reputation with the public rather than to boost her own rationales for being President.
Actually, the Springer bit is re-playing now–he just said it was “outrageous” if she isn’t the only person considered for the VP. (He was also completely off-target --the topic wasn’t “Whether Hillary should be Obama’s pick” but rather whether Obama’s current vetting of 16 other candidates, some of whose names haven’t emerged on this thread yet, was aimed at sending her a message “I’ve got LOTS of qualified choices,” and Springer just went a little nuts, I guess. What;s outrageous is that people like him are running around loose.
The more I read about Lincoln Chafee, the more I like.
A former Republican Senator who seems to be more liberal and progressive then most Dems.
He was the only Repub to vote against the invasion of Iraq
…again, a Republican Senator who voted *against * going into Iraq!
He publicly supports Obama. In 2004, in protest of Dubya, he wrote in George H.W. Bush.
He is pro-choice, pro same-sex marriage, pro stem cell research.
Pro federal funding of Healthcare.
He is incredibly stong on environmental issues.
Opposed all of Bush’s tax policies.
Supports pro-Israeli, pro-peace PAC of JStreet, as well as an independant Palestinian State.
This guy is the perfect Democrat; the fact that he was a Republican and would represent bipartisanship, is just gravy.
He is the anti-Lieberman!
Also, just imagine the OBAMA/LINCOLN signs and stickers!