Who are people thinking will get picked?

reality is that none of us have a freaking clue, but it's still interesting to speculate.

My picks: Obama: Gen. Wesley Clark McCain: Tim Pawlenty

In support of Clark, he's a former Clinton supporter, has military/foreign policy credentials that top McCain's, and is reasonably well-liked. Karl Rove Strategy 101 says take your opponent's strength and make it his weakness -- which is exactly what happened with Kerry -- and he can hit McCain on his perceived strength in a way that Obama cannot. I heard Clark on some show the other day pointing out that while McCain's service was honorable and courageous, when it comes to military service in a leadership role of the kind that would translate to being Commander-in-Chief, he's got about as much as Obama. Now whether that's fair is another matter, but he might be the only guy in the Democratic party that can make a charge like that and get away with it.

On the down side, he's not a great campaigner, and I don't think he really helps Obama out in any state that he wouldn't win anyway.

Pawlenty gives McCain a shot at at least one Great Lakes state, which he needs desperately if he should lose Ohio or a few western states. I think it's just that simple. Not sure that any of the other options offer him the same upside. In fairness, though, I don't pay as close attention to what McCain is doing, so someone else may have some more intelligent thoughts on the matter.

Thoughts?

Re: Veepstakes

Might be able to cross Ted Strickland off McCain's list:

[QUOTE][B]Gov. Strickland on McCain’s Ohio Trip: “I’m Puzzled”[/B]

Ohio’s Democratic governor reacts on Obama media call to McCain’s stop in his state Thursday, says he doesn’t think the Arizonan can gain “any significant foothold” in the battleground state.

Particularly questions his choice to visit Youngstown.

“I cannot imagine that Senator McCain could hope to gain political advantage in the Mahoning Valley. It’s an area that has been devastated by Bush administration policies.”[/QUOTE]

[url]http://thepage.time.com/2008/06/26/another-thursday-another-mccain-presidential-town-hall/[/url]

:lol:

Re: Veepstakes

I'm with you on Clark, but I think Bobby Jindal (Louisiana governor) would be a solid choice for McCain. He's only a year older than the minimum age to be president, and he has a similar style life story to Obama with his immigrant parents.

Regardless of who I support, the thing I like about Jindal is that he has that ability like Obama to explain his positions in simple terms that make sense. His passion for getting New Orleans rebuilt is also a plus and is what got him elected governor in the first place.

If for no other reason though, Jindal could help because he is about as opposite as you can get, superficially, in the Republican party when compared to McCain: half McCain's age and Indian.

Re: Veepstakes

it is difficult to argue that Wesley Clark is not one of the top choices at Obama's fingers right now. However, you clearly have hinted upon the worst part about Clarke in the image of Obama's campgain. That is to say, Clarke is not a great campaigner.

More importantly, with this country sick of war, adding a military person to the executive branch doesn't seem like a great idea. Does Clark add anything more than just military experience? Put in another way, with little other credentials than that of sealing up Obama's weakness, a vice president with strong military backgrounds running in the darkness of expanded executive powers controlled by a far-left politician, leaves much to anyones imagination. And it eases up great leverage for an attack on this, as i've mentioned in another thread, 'totalitarian' theme.

I think Clark may actually hurt Obama. It could very well make RP voters to re-consider voting for Mccain. It might even do that for LP'ers as well. And, it would also detract from the pacifist and non-interventionist sect of the Left who would be absolutely outraged at this choice.

In consideration that the government is run like a business, and not a military battalion, it would be more prudent to stick with Webb. Not only is he heavily entrenched in politics, but he's also a Southern Democrat which could tie over parts of the South, and perhaps clinch GA too. He's a grad from the Georgetown Law Center, plus a Marine (as opposed to Clark's army service). I think Webb gives just the right amount of balance, which I think choosing Clark would seriously overcompensate.

Two great persons, I just happen to think Webb has the edge.

For McCain? Serious talks about Jindal in the press. He may patch things up with Romney, who offers some balance as governor....although I think he might be chosen for a cabinet position (for whatever reason...). I know little about Pawlenty, but he's similarly situated with Huckabee and Romney on Intrade.com

[URL]http://www.intrade.com/[/URL]

If you want strong predictors....check that out...

Re: Veepstakes

[QUOTE=88Mariner;618233]

[URL]http://www.intrade.com/[/URL]

If you want strong predictors....check that out...[/QUOTE]

I tend to not put as much stock in intrade on something like this, because the process is so secretive that there's nothing other than semi-blind speculation for the market to work from. There's research you can do, etc., etc., but ultimately there's only 3 or 4 people who really know who's close.

I like Webb and think he would be a good choice, particularly as he's a former Republican and matches that post-partisan mold. I think after working so hard to get that Senate seat, though, the DNC might put some pressure on Obama to pick someone else unless he's well, well ahead of the pack.

Re: Veepstakes

[QUOTE=MJDub;618230]I'm with you on Clark, but I think Bobby Jindal (Louisiana governor) would be a solid choice for McCain. He's only a year older than the minimum age to be president, and he has a similar style life story to Obama with his immigrant parents.

Regardless of who I support, the thing I like about Jindal is that he has that ability like Obama to explain his positions in simple terms that make sense. His passion for getting New Orleans rebuilt is also a plus and is what got him elected governor in the first place.

If for no other reason though, Jindal could help because he is about as opposite as you can get, superficially, in the Republican party when compared to McCain: half McCain's age and Indian.[/QUOTE]

Jindal was just in the news yesterday signing a bill that will permit chemical castration of sex offenders:

[url]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/26/louisiana-gov-jindal-auth_n_109342.html[/url]

At the risk of hijacking my own thread, what do people think about that? For some reason, although I'm actually kinda behind the [I]death penalty[/I] for sex offenders, this almost seems more draconian. I think it's the big brother component of it. Or maybe that it involves the balls, which I hold dear. Probably the latter.

I actually don't have strong feelings about this one way or the other, but I do think it's funny that my thinking on this issue was:

"Death for sex offenders? That seems reasonable." "[I]Castration [/I]for sex offenders? Whoa, hold the phone, that's a little harsh..."

:lol:

Re: Veepstakes

LOL I hadn't heard about that bill, but I think it's actually pretty hilarious. I'm all for killing sex offenders, and this bill just seems like Hammurabi's way of going about that. You know they would either kill themselves or die from the wounds shortly thereafter.

[unsolicited rant] This may sound incredibly harsh, and probably un-American and uncivilized because of the cruel and unusual punishment, but I feel that sex offenders (particularly those of children) are sub-human and should be treated as such. They are no different than murderers because they destroy their victims' futures just as a murderer does, but their victims still have to live a scarred life, which I submit is much worse than being murdered. Sex offenders forfeit basic human rights when they commit that heinous offense. So bring on the chemicals. [/unsolicited rant]

On a side note, I think it was a good move by Obama to come out against the Supreme Court's ruling about killing rapists. It may offend the far left somewhat, but the vast majority of Americans (as I do and he does) believe that killing sex offenders is just. He losing no votes from the far left either, so great move.

Re: Veepstakes

I heard about it yesterday listening to glenn beck. he had jindal on talking about it. I was going to comment about jindal on this thread apropos his comments, but didn't want to hijack. that said, and this topic opening up, i'll say a few things.

In a perfect criminal justice system, I think putting a child rapist to death is quite acceptable. It is certainly a crime that 'shocks the conscience'. If it's not cruel or unusual to execute a murderer, then it's not too far a stretch to say it is not cruel or unusual to execute a heinous sex offender.

However, we are nto anywhere close to having a perfect criminal justice system. There are far too instances where there are unexamined questions in sex crime cases, often the result of a prosecutor who's trying to rack up wins, or an inexperienced public defender missing important objections. And this from my own experience watching trials, working in law offices and clerking for judges.

This goes without pointing out we have a troubling history in the united states of convicting innocent people on child sex abuse charges. [URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day_care_sexual_abuse_hysteria[/URL]

Further, consider that strong majority of persons who commit such abuses are relatives of the children. And again in my experience working for a Child Services legal division, even such claims often have instances of false accusations by a divorcing parents, or frivolous ones made by the molesting person. Thus, i think the decision was a good one on these grounds.

By extension, I also disagree with such draconian responses signed into law by Jindal the very goddamn day they came out with the SCOTUS decision. He was so ready to do it. I was really angered to hear that.

For crimes of sexual abuses, I would strongly recommend that only physical punishments (chemical castration, death, etc...) only be for those individuals who confess to such crimes, and only then, upon a bifurcated sentencing hearing.

So jindal can eat my ass.

Re: Veepstakes

I just read Lew Rockwell's take on this, which is simplified in a short line: "This does remind me of the fundmental problem with the death penalty, though. It assumes the state - the same state that can't deliver the mail or win a war or build a working levee - is competent to provide a proper trial"

Re: Veepstakes

[quote=88Mariner;618670]I just read Lew Rockwell's take on this, which is simplified in a short line: "This does remind me of the fundmental problem with the death penalty, though. It assumes the state - the same state that can't deliver the mail or win a war or build a working levee - is competent to provide a proper trial"[/quote]

Fair point.

Re: Veepstakes

For Obama, what about Bill Richardson? Seems like the guy has loads of experience to help the administration and brings in the Hispanic vote.

Re: Veepstakes

Toasty: Clark is looking fantastic again. Webb has just unequivocally stated he will not consider the VP spot.

And why Clark? I've thought out one more bonus: It removes no sitting governor, congressman, or senator from his or her seat.

Re: Veepstakes

^^I think the GOP's hit job on Clark was successful, which is unfortunate because he was 100% right about the difference between the courage that McCain showed as a POW and the qualifications for CIC. I don't even have a problem with the way he said it, esp. since he never would have put it that way if he weren't parroting back Schieffer's question.

Oh well. Maybe Evan Bayh? Webb's out of the running, so Bayh would be the safe, if milquetoast, pick. I have no problem with Bayh, it's just that he's always on these "could be president/could be VP" lists. Not exactly thinking outside of the box.

Aren't you from Indiana? What's your take on him?

Re: Veepstakes

yes. indiana, out living in philly. um bayh...well, the democrats I knew back in Indiana absolutely hated him. I can't recall them articulating why, but it was by no means based on simple disagreements.

You know who's not out of the running? Biden.

Re: Veepstakes

[QUOTE=88Mariner;621869]

You know who's not out of the running? Biden.[/QUOTE]

I think I've made my mancrush on Biden pretty well-known before, so I'd obviously be totally cool with that. I still think he'd be an unlikely pick, though, because he's so much the consummate Washington insider, and he has a habit of saying the wrong thing, giving him the potential to be a net negative.

Then again, if frontrunners like Webb, Clark and Strickland keep taking themselves out of the running, who knows...

Re: Veepstakes

Biden rules. He makes McCain's "straight talk" seem trivial. :lol:

Re: Veepstakes

don't want to really write a book about this but for mccain i'd choose bobby jindal or sarah palin (alaska gov). those seem like very viable options. sarah palin has turned some heads and would definitely broaden his voter base.