2008 Running-Mates

[darklinensuit]

I know, I know, I'm guilty of premature evaluation here, but humor me with a bit of discussion regarding potential running-mates, even though it's still so very early in the process of choosing the main party candidates for the American presidency.

So far it seems that Edwards is setting himself up to be on an Obama ticket. He certainly has burned some bridges with Hillary.
Hillary has attacked Obama's lack of experience, but I think Bill's attacks on his (allegedly sneaky) campaigning are the ones that might be the bigger factor in hindering a Clinton-Obama ticket. Of course, the press would focus mainly on the match-up of a white woman and a black man, also hurting any fair chance the ticket might have.
I'm not sure that the choice of Richardson would reach out to a large number of independent voters. He certainly lacks the phusical pokish of an Edwards, though tghat might help him.
I cannot imagine anybody choosing Kerry or Leiberman. Kerry disappointed in 2004 (though he might be a voice for experience on an Obama ticket, I doubt he offers much), and Leiberman's voice is one of the least charismatic I have ever heard. (He sounds like the dad from the TV show "Alf".)
Given his recent favorable publicity, Gore might be a popular choice for many voters, but he said in 2007 that he is not at all interested in the position.
As for the notion of another Clinton-Gore ticket, the press would portray it as nostalgia, or Hillary trying to throw us backwards. One of the things that has surprised me about this election is how the pundits (at least since a few days before NH) are painting any reference to Bill Clinton's involvement as a step back that helps doom Hillary's candidacy. In 2000 the polls said that Bill could have won that election, were he allowed to run, & I don't know many people who think the economy is better now than it was when he left office. I would have expected her (and the other Dems!)to be making a bigger deal about a balanced budget, at least.

On the Republican side, some people are talking of a McCain-Huckabee match, which is hard to fathom.
McCain-Giuliani might play well in some northern states, but ignores too many of the R. die-hards.
Impossible to think of any candidates choosing Romney, or Romney choosing any of them. Then again, Reagan and Bush weren't exactly enamored of each other.

Bloomberg could be a match on either party ticket, some say. I don't think his abandonment of both parties would be what keeps him off. But I do think his wealth & lack of national experience would hurt a ticket.

Has anybody here read Linda Ellerbee's account of breaking into a building's rooftop in 1980 in order to use binoculars to spot Carter's choice through the window of the button-maker next-door? Right when the machines started printing, two gangs showed up on the rooftop & surrounded her, so she lost the story.

I know there are some posters who avoid the political discussions, so I'm trying to keep the tone here nice - as in, I'm not asking whom you favor, just where you think we'll end up.

Thoughts?

- Jake

[markolas]

Well, I'd take Bill back in a heartbeat over what we've got now, so I don't see how the press can say "going back" in that sense is a bad thing. I hate how they are spinning this election, and I'm trying not to pay a hell of a lot of attention to them.

I think Bill Richardson & Wesley Clark are both likely running mates for Clinton. An Obama/Edwards ticket might work. As for the Republicans, I really have no idea. McCain/Huckabee seems like it would be a real clunker of a ticket to me, but there are enough idiots in this country who just might fall for it, so...

And I still believe Hillary will get the Dem nomination, no matter how big a deal the media made about her losing Iowa. Big whoop.

I think there's a chance Huckabee may surprise everyone and snag the Republican nomination; the evangelicals and social conservatives need someone to get behind, and he's basically it; I also think McCain has a good chance; Guiliani & Romney, not so much.

[paperflowers]

I can't see Edwards taking second in command again but if he did I agree that an Obama/Edwards ticket is more likely than a Clinton/Edwards one. A Clinton/Obama ticket would be perfect too me but it's a pipe dream. Regarding Clinton, here in Ohio we have a very popular Governor Ted Strickland; there is much talk of him being on her short list along with Clark, and Richards.
Strickland would be an interesting choice he is a moderate Dem a minister, ballsy as hell, personable, great great speech maker, and very anti-Iraq war. If the nomination isn’t settled by Super Tuesday the Ohio primary held March 4 will come into play with 161 dem delegates, Strickland has already endorsed Clinton so maybe that will figure into her decision.
For Obama I think it may be important to choose someone with a name not another “insurgent” to negate the whole experience thing, which might bring in the blue dog dems who seem to be with Clinton so far and lost to a McCain ticket in the general. I like Edwards a lot, maybe Schumer? Biden? Dodd?

As far as the Republicans I really can’t fathom, they are in such disarray right now. McCain/Huckabee may seem like a lead balloon but it’s the best I can think of.

[David]

I think it's very hard for primary opponents to buddy up as running mates because they've been attacking one another in print & on TV for an entire year. It leaves a weird residue if they get together on a ticket. What do they say to each other? Do they just suddenly decide to forget the past year? Just not mention it? Pretend it never happened? It's weird, man . . . it's weird.

The only current candidate I would even remotely consider voting for -- & probably only if I were inebriated -- is Ron Paul, so if I had to think of a VP for Paul, how about David Boaz? He isn't a politician per se, but what the hell. I'd feel a measure of comfort that the two highest leaders, if nobody else, would consider it of supreme importance to keep their grasping claws out of my wallet, my home & my life in general.

[buckymcnix]

If Obama wins, there is but one choice.
Senator Dodd.

Say it with me Ledgies
"ObamaDodd"

Say it outloud and you will know it's right.

"ObamaDodd"

It just has the ring of inevitability to it. No?




My housemate heard a radio skit about this but i have to agree that it's the best sounding combo of names by far.

My real answer to both the DEM. running mate and candidate question is that they are all head and shoulders above what we have now.

being in oregon with a may primary, who cares what I think though. lol

[Stew_Matthews]

As an outsider, the 2008 US Presidential election is fascinating, although a little scary given the worldwide agenda. The Clinton-Obama race looks tight, and the Republican pack is potentially split four ways. So it looks like it will take some time to establish who the nominees will be.

In terms of who the running mates could be, I agree that the ‘dream ticket’ of Obama and Clinton isn’t going to happen. I think Clinton will win the nomination but given how bitter the race is becoming, I can’t see the runner-up lining up alongside whoever the winning candidate is.

On the Republican side, the only one I can see winning is John McCain, on the basis he can get the independent vote out. If he can get some funding I wouldn’t be surprised to see he and Huckabee in the election, though I accept it is difficult to see them on the same ticket. The Republicans know how to win and they will do anything I suspect to stop Clinton. I don’t think a McCain/Giuliani ticket is out of the question if opinion polls still favour the Democrats in a few months and they need more votes from the centre.

The real test, is when the Republican ’machinery’ rolls into action, will the Democrats hold it together. Gore should never have lost, but did and Kerry was blown away. As an outsider, if McCain gets through, he’ll take some beating I suspect.

[darklinensuit]

Originally Posted by buckymcnix

If Obama wins, there is but one choice.
Senator Dodd.

Say it with me Ledgies
"ObamaDodd"

Say it outloud and you will know it's right.

"ObamaDodd"

It just has the ring of inevitability to it. No?




My housemate heard a radio skit about this but i have to agree that it's the best sounding combo of names by far.

My real answer to both the DEM. running mate and candidate question is that they are all head and shoulders above what we have now.

being in oregon with a may primary, who cares what I think though. lol

Granted, it glides off the tongue more readily than Huck-iani or McCain-abee.

- Jake

[LukeA]

Originally Posted by buckymcnix

If Obama wins, there is but one choice.
Senator Dodd.

Say it with me Ledgies
"ObamaDodd"

Say it outloud and you will know it's right.

"ObamaDodd"

It just has the ring of inevitability to it. No?




My housemate heard a radio skit about this but i have to agree that it's the best sounding combo of names by far.

My real answer to both the DEM. running mate and candidate question is that they are all head and shoulders above what we have now.

being in oregon with a may primary, who cares what I think though. lol

http://www.boston.com/news/local/con...ong_democrats/

Dodd has no interest in being VP... which is good, because I'm inclined to feel likewise.

We're about a month away from the point where we can begin to realistically size up Veep nomination likelihoods. I'll join back in this thread then.