![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
Veepstakes
Well, that's why I'm not a political analyst, I guess. Obama 57/41 in Montana, Clinton 55/45 in SoDak. Eh, close. Still more right than Mark Penn.
Guessing Hillary gets offered Veep and turns it down. I don't think Obama has any other choice -- given the nature of the finish, her pull in Florida in the northeast, and the very fact that she seems unwilling to give up (I keep hear her quoting Adam Savage: "I reject your reality and substitute my own!"), you gotta give her the opportunity to spurn. And spurn she will -- I don't think she wants to spend four more years in Washington in a position of subservience. So I anticipate her being rewarded, at some juncture -- probably not the cabinet, more likely SCOTUS -- but not as VP.
So that leaves the usual cattle call of senators and governors from swing states. I take Kathleen Sebelius off the list automatically -- Kansas isn't a swing state (I don't think you deliver Kansas no matter who you pick, and even so, it's just six electoral votes anyway), and I hate to think what Hillary's reaction would be if another woman were chosen. Evan Bayh and Jim Webb get mentioned a lot, and they've both got intangibles as well as the very tangible of possibly delivering Ohio, which is both substantial and teetering between red and blue. My personal favorite pick would be Wesley Clark, not only to soothe internal divisions as a longtime Clintonite, but also because of his distinguished military service, which you can bet will be a Republican drumbeat come the fall.
Who does McCain pick? I don't think he needs to placate those Republicans who blustered they'd vote for anyone except McCain -- that seems so long ago, doesn't it? Mike Huckabee seems to take him farther away from swing voters. Mitt Romney seems to be a more solid choice, he's certainly more at ease in front of a camera than McCain (as the lime green disaster proved last night). Chuck Hagel would be a good pick, but I don't think he'd do it. Lieberman is a long shot, but he'd help with the centrist/maverick perception McCain is after. Dunno. I'm pretty sure it's going to be someone we've seen in prominence recently and not a Dan-Quayle-obscurity-level pick. Curious.
Either way, let the monotony of the primaries be replaced with the mindless drone that lasts until November. Though I think -- unlike 2000 and 2004 -- this race will be over long before then.
Guessing Hillary gets offered Veep and turns it down. I don't think Obama has any other choice -- given the nature of the finish, her pull in Florida in the northeast, and the very fact that she seems unwilling to give up (I keep hear her quoting Adam Savage: "I reject your reality and substitute my own!"), you gotta give her the opportunity to spurn. And spurn she will -- I don't think she wants to spend four more years in Washington in a position of subservience. So I anticipate her being rewarded, at some juncture -- probably not the cabinet, more likely SCOTUS -- but not as VP.
So that leaves the usual cattle call of senators and governors from swing states. I take Kathleen Sebelius off the list automatically -- Kansas isn't a swing state (I don't think you deliver Kansas no matter who you pick, and even so, it's just six electoral votes anyway), and I hate to think what Hillary's reaction would be if another woman were chosen. Evan Bayh and Jim Webb get mentioned a lot, and they've both got intangibles as well as the very tangible of possibly delivering Ohio, which is both substantial and teetering between red and blue. My personal favorite pick would be Wesley Clark, not only to soothe internal divisions as a longtime Clintonite, but also because of his distinguished military service, which you can bet will be a Republican drumbeat come the fall.
Who does McCain pick? I don't think he needs to placate those Republicans who blustered they'd vote for anyone except McCain -- that seems so long ago, doesn't it? Mike Huckabee seems to take him farther away from swing voters. Mitt Romney seems to be a more solid choice, he's certainly more at ease in front of a camera than McCain (as the lime green disaster proved last night). Chuck Hagel would be a good pick, but I don't think he'd do it. Lieberman is a long shot, but he'd help with the centrist/maverick perception McCain is after. Dunno. I'm pretty sure it's going to be someone we've seen in prominence recently and not a Dan-Quayle-obscurity-level pick. Curious.
Either way, let the monotony of the primaries be replaced with the mindless drone that lasts until November. Though I think -- unlike 2000 and 2004 -- this race will be over long before then.
no subject
Now with the experience she has with the position and the Senate, if she had the usual suspects to run against, she'd get a lot more support from the media. I'm not saying she wouldn't have taken some unfair shots, because there are misogynistic jerks everywhere, but she would have had an easier time of it. The problem is that she's running against the most genuinely likeable candidate we've seen since Bill and perhaps since JFK, who also happens to have his own novelty.
Combine this with the near-panic the Democrats are in to not screw up the seemingly can't-lose election, kicking out the Republicans after six+ years of the Iraq War, and it's easy to see why Clinton got the media dogpile.
Thinking more about the Republican Veep race, here's a candidate that would look like an absolutely superficial and self-serving choice, but would really be a darn good one: Condoleeza Rice. She's smart, she knows the office, she's knows a little something about foreign policy, and - oh, yeah....
no subject