Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community  

Go Back   Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community > The Academy > Tilted Politics


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 06-04-2008, 10:08 AM   #1 (permalink)
... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.
 
Willravel's Avatar
 
Who will be Obama's Vice President?

Edwards? Richardson? Gore? Bill Clinton (yes, it'd be legal)?

Who is your choice and who do you think he will choose?

My hope would be for him to ask Al Gore or Dennis "Long Shot" Kucinich, but if he's smart he'll either go with Richardson or walk across the aisle.
Willravel is offline  
Old 06-04-2008, 10:25 AM   #2 (permalink)
Human
 
SecretMethod70's Avatar
 
Administrator
Location: Chicago
uh...Kucinich?

I dunno, will, it's one thing to have wished Kucinich were a more viable candidate, but he's gone...why even bother mentioning him as VP to a president who is nothing like him politically, and who would gain absolutely nothing from having him on his ticket? It's almost as silly as a Republican hoping that Obama will pich Romney as his VP.

Anyway, the only way Clinton (both, but the only one that's worth considering is Hillary anyway) will get picked for VP is by forcing herself into it. I wouldn't put it past her.

Sibelius is, unfortunately, out, because apparently the Clinton campaign insists that if Obama picks a woman it must be Clinton. A shame, cause I think Sibelius could be a good pick.

I don't think Edwards is a realistic choice, both because he's already been an unsuccessful VP candidate once before and I don't think he really brings much (though I tend to agree with Kos that the VP choice doesn't change much in the first place). I think it's more likely that Edwards could get a cabinet position.

No way in hell Gore is going to be the VP choice, but cabinet position is a distant possibility.

Richardson and Webb are both possibilities. I think Biden is a strong consideration, but I also think the talk of him as Secretary of State is more likely. Schweitzer is another one that is being mentioned lately which I think is a reasonable possibility.
__________________
Le temps détruit tout

"Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling
SecretMethod70 is offline  
Old 06-04-2008, 10:53 AM   #3 (permalink)
Darth Papa
 
ratbastid's Avatar
 
Location: Yonder
Richardson would get him the Southwest, where he's not strong, and Latinos where he's downright weak.

Webb would get him closer to getting Appalachia, where he's liable to be lynched.

Sibelius, a female working-state governor, would be a good all-round pick, and I don't see how Hillary gets to dictate any particular terms about it. Her legacy is on the line here. Surely she doesn't really think that she can leave the rift un-healed, put the Democratic White House at risk, and then swoop in in 2012?

Jimmy Carter said yesterday that an Obama/Clinton ticket would be a failure either way round, because of the 50% of America that are unfavorable on Clinton, plus the percent that would never vote Obama. He thinks it's a loser no matter who heads that ticket.
ratbastid is offline  
Old 06-04-2008, 10:54 AM   #4 (permalink)
... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.
 
Willravel's Avatar
 
The first part of the question is "who is your choice?" My dream choice is still Kucinich or Gore. Kucinich isn't popular or mainstream enough, and Gore will probably turn it down, but a man can dream.

Biden would make a fantastic Sec State. I'm still wondering if Obama will take the high road and choose conservatives for his staff or the ViP.
Willravel is offline  
Old 06-04-2008, 11:06 AM   #5 (permalink)
Human
 
SecretMethod70's Avatar
 
Administrator
Location: Chicago
Quote:
Originally Posted by ratbastid
Richardson would get him the Southwest, where he's not strong, and Latinos where he's downright weak.
Richardson is the one VP that I think could actually deliver votes, but in general I think the evidence is convincing that VPs don't create much of a vote swing one way or the other. That said, this race may be different because of McCain's age and the worries people have about Obama and assassination. So, perhaps the VPs in this race will be more important.

Quote:
Webb would get him closer to getting Appalachia, where he's liable to be lynched.
I think Webb would be a very interesting choice, but I'm not sure it would make a huge difference in Appalachia. At least not to the point where it would change the outcome of state votes. Still, he'd be a good choice from what I can tell.

Quote:
Sibelius, a female working-state governor, would be a good all-round pick, and I don't see how Hillary gets to dictate any particular terms about it. Her legacy is on the line here. Surely she doesn't really think that she can leave the rift un-healed, put the Democratic White House at risk, and then swoop in in 2012?
She's entirely out of the race now and she is refusing to concede...yes, I do think that she's willing to risk leaving the rift unhealed if she doesn't get what she wants. I also think her fanatical supporters are crazy enough to also be upset if Obama were to choose another woman. Yet more evidence, on top of the threats to vote McCain, that Clinton's "feminist" supporters have no idea what "feminism" they're fighting for. A real feminist would be overjoyed if Obama picked Sibelius, even if they'd have preferred Clinton. Personally, from what I know about her, I'd love to see Sibelius picked.

Quote:
Jimmy Carter said yesterday that an Obama/Clinton ticket would be a failure either way round, because of the 50% of America that are unfavorable on Clinton, plus the percent that would never vote Obama. He thinks it's a loser no matter who heads that ticket.
Completely agree.
__________________
Le temps détruit tout

"Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling
SecretMethod70 is offline  
Old 06-04-2008, 11:06 AM   #6 (permalink)
Crazy
 
Bees's Avatar
 
Location: New Hampshire, US
Richardson is my dream choice for pulling in the Latino voters but I think he will be better utilized as the Sec State.
__________________
The sands of time past keep shifting according to how we remember or forget or refashion it in hindsight, which is no sight at all.
Kajal Basu
Bees is offline  
Old 06-04-2008, 11:06 AM   #7 (permalink)
Human
 
SecretMethod70's Avatar
 
Administrator
Location: Chicago
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willravel
Biden would make a fantastic Sec State. I'm still wondering if Obama will take the high road and choose conservatives for his staff or the ViP.
Definitely not for VP, but perhaps for some cabinet positions.
__________________
Le temps détruit tout

"Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling
SecretMethod70 is offline  
Old 06-04-2008, 11:06 AM   #8 (permalink)
 
dc_dux's Avatar
 
Location: Washington DC
My choice is now Ed Rendell, Gov of PA.

Or another old white guy/Hillary surrigate from a key state - Ted Strickland, Gov of OH.

Both can appeal to both the blue collar whites and the seniors who were a key part of Clinton's base.

Or..a defense/foreign policy guy... Gen Wes Clark.

Webb would be a nightmare for attracting the other part of Clinton's base...women....he has a past record of serious gender issues.` As good as he is for the Dem party in the Senate, he is also a terrible campaigner.

I like Richardson as well, but he is a gaffe machine waiting to happen.
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire

Last edited by dc_dux; 06-04-2008 at 11:08 AM.. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
dc_dux is offline  
Old 06-04-2008, 11:08 AM   #9 (permalink)
Human
 
SecretMethod70's Avatar
 
Administrator
Location: Chicago
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bees
Richardson is my dream choice for pulling in the Latino voters but I think he will be better utilized as the Sec State.
Yeah, in that sense I think Richardson and Biden are interchangable, with the exception of Richardson's Latino appeal. If Richardson doesn't get picked for VP, I do think he'd be an excelled Sec of State, and I prefer him for that role over Biden. Which is a bit of a shame, since I do think Biden would make a good Sec of State.
__________________
Le temps détruit tout

"Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling
SecretMethod70 is offline  
Old 06-04-2008, 11:12 AM   #10 (permalink)
... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.
 
Willravel's Avatar
 
BTW, is anyone else a bit excited about the possibility of a completely non-white ticket? The liberal in me is jumping up and down at the prospect of Obama/Richardson '08. It's about damn time.

The only real question will be: can Richardson make Obama look like a badass ticket? McCain will undoubtedly be touted for his military experience. Wouldn't it be wise for Obama to pick someone with an extensive military and foreign policy background?
Willravel is offline  
Old 06-04-2008, 11:14 AM   #11 (permalink)
 
dc_dux's Avatar
 
Location: Washington DC
I dont think Richardson brings anything to the ticket. Obama can win CO and NM without him and he brings little of value to other battleground states.

This is all assuming the VP choice makes any real difference in the campaign..which is a stretch...as opposed to in the value of the person in government as VP, when they win.
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire

Last edited by dc_dux; 06-04-2008 at 11:16 AM.. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
dc_dux is offline  
Old 06-04-2008, 11:16 AM   #12 (permalink)
Human
 
SecretMethod70's Avatar
 
Administrator
Location: Chicago
dc_dux: I think you're probably right, but I think Richardson brings more than anyone else would (which is not to say much) since there are Latinos all over the country who may be inspired by his presence on the ticket. I think Sibelius would bring a lot to the ticket, if not for the aforementioned crazy Clinton supporters who are willing to cut off their nose to spite their face. If it weren't for the tone this race has taken, I think picking Sibelius would have been a great way to tap into the enthusiasm Clinton's candidacy already engendered among women.

Will: That's where Webb comes in. Again, I don't think it makes that big of a difference, but that's the biggest thing he brings to the ticket. Former Republican, military man.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dc_dux
This is all assuming the VP choice makes any real difference in the campaign..which is a stretch...as opposed to in the value of the person in government as VP, when they win.
Yup. And by that metric, I think Obama has a lot of very good options out there, and I'm eager to see which one he picks.
__________________
Le temps détruit tout

"Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

Last edited by SecretMethod70; 06-04-2008 at 11:19 AM.. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
SecretMethod70 is offline  
Old 06-04-2008, 11:28 AM   #13 (permalink)
 
dc_dux's Avatar
 
Location: Washington DC
I think he will be guided by two fundamental principles of presidential campaign politics..
Winning tickets are generally an Inside/Outside combo - as an insider (US Senator), he will look first for someone outside the beltway...either a governor or a military man

Americans want change..but not that much at all once - that means the most acceptable balance is an old white man with experience
A third principle just occured to me:
Good Cop/Bad Cop - Obama wants to remain above the fray and needs a "pitbull" (no not ace) to take the lead on hitting "the other side"
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire

Last edited by dc_dux; 06-04-2008 at 11:39 AM.. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
dc_dux is offline  
Old 06-04-2008, 11:52 AM   #14 (permalink)
... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.
 
Willravel's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SecretMethod70
Will: That's where Webb comes in. Again, I don't think it makes that big of a difference, but that's the biggest thing he brings to the ticket. Former Republican, military man.
SecNav and former GOP... whoa. He might be a very interesting choice.

I particularly liked:
Bush: "How's your son?"
Webb: "I'd like to get them out of Iraq, Mr. President."
Bush: "That's not what I asked you. How's your boy?"
Webb: "That's between me and my boy, Mr. President."

The man has balls.
Willravel is offline  
Old 06-04-2008, 12:07 PM   #15 (permalink)
 
dc_dux's Avatar
 
Location: Washington DC
The Clinton womens brigade is not gonna like rehearing when Webb wrote "Women Cant Fight" and called the Naval Academy "a horny woman's dream,"....granted it was years ago and didnt hurt him in his Senate campaign.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nathan..._b_103203.html

The other downside would be risking a Dem seat in the Senate.
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire

Last edited by dc_dux; 06-04-2008 at 12:10 PM..
dc_dux is offline  
Old 06-04-2008, 12:13 PM   #16 (permalink)
... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.
 
Willravel's Avatar
 
To be fair, if the military were all women for thousands of years and I was the first man? I have to admit that my mind might not be on soldiering.

But in all seriousness, it was a dumb thing to say.
Willravel is offline  
Old 06-04-2008, 03:08 PM   #17 (permalink)
immoral minority
 
ASU2003's Avatar
 
Location: Back in Ohio
I don't think that he will choose a white man. I think he will have to pick someone that a racist assassin would hate becoming President if something did happen to Obama. It's probably the same philosophy that the current administration used. Bush isn't the best, but Cheney would have been much worse.

If I took a guess it would be Richardson. He would have to work on getting Hillary someplace in the administration to keep the older white women voting for him.
ASU2003 is offline  
Old 06-04-2008, 03:35 PM   #18 (permalink)
Darth Papa
 
ratbastid's Avatar
 
Location: Yonder
Wes Clark?

Imagine a West Point valedictorian and Rhodes Scholar against a damn-near-dropout plane-crashing albino chowderhead! Who's got military credibility now??
ratbastid is offline  
Old 06-04-2008, 03:37 PM   #19 (permalink)
Insane
 
I think Sibelius would be a great choice. Hopefully some of Hillary's supporters would vote that way then.
rlbond86 is offline  
Old 06-04-2008, 05:48 PM   #20 (permalink)
Junkie
 
I think Kathleen Sebelius would be the best overall choice. I do think Obama pretty much has to pick a woman to help smooth things over with some of the feminists. I don't know that she'll be able to deliver Kansas, but she does have a good bipartisan reputation which is really important for the whole change message Obama is about. And I don't think that it would be a good thing to have two Senators on the ticket, there should be some balance.
laconic1 is offline  
Old 06-04-2008, 05:53 PM   #21 (permalink)
Kick Ass Kunoichi
 
snowy's Avatar
 
Location: Oregon
Quote:
Originally Posted by ratbastid
Wes Clark?

Imagine a West Point valedictorian and Rhodes Scholar against a damn-near-dropout plane-crashing albino chowderhead! Who's got military credibility now??
I certainly hope Wes Clark's name is on the table.
__________________
If I am not better, at least I am different. --Jean-Jacques Rousseau
snowy is offline  
Old 06-04-2008, 06:00 PM   #22 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Bill Clinton cannot legally be vice president due to the 12th amendment.
Rekna is offline  
Old 06-04-2008, 06:03 PM   #23 (permalink)
 
roachboy's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: essex ma
i read the interview with jimmy carter and think he has a point--but i'm not clear about why that point is so definitive as to knock hillary clinton out of "consideration" even here. before the repetition machinery of 24/7 cable "news" got ahold of things, and before the campaign took a turn for the ugly, i thought both obama and clinton quite articulate, politically quite close and compatible and a potentially quite strong ticket.

what i am uneasy about in the possibility really is bill, whose performances have been often kinda squeam-inducing.

but i see that ticket as good in principle--certainly more appealing than a ticket involving rendell (too long living in pennsylvania, not a fan of his particularly).

so why would any of the alternatives being floated above be preferable? i mean apart from the point that carter made, which is pretty self-evident (clinton as the object of a sustained conservative group-hate is not news)
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite
roachboy is offline  
Old 06-04-2008, 06:08 PM   #24 (permalink)
... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.
 
Willravel's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rekna
Bill Clinton cannot legally be vice president due to the 12th amendment.
I'm afraid that's incorrect. The 12th Amendment says that anybody who is eligible for the presidency under Article II of the Constitution is eligible for the vice presidency. Bill Clinton is a natural born citizen over 35. The 22nd doesn't apply, of course.

So yes, he can't be elected to the presidency more than twice, but he can serve as vice president and can even assume the job if the president has to leave office. He just can't be elected at the end of his final term.
Willravel is offline  
Old 06-04-2008, 06:13 PM   #25 (permalink)
Living in a Warmer Insanity
 
Tully Mars's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: Yucatan, Mexico
I'm happy with any of the following:

Webb
Richardson
Clark
Hagel (though I'd be shocked if he accepted)
Rendell

Probably in that order too. I think Webb and Clark bring military credibility to the ticket and Richardson has a ton of experience.

I don't know enough about Sibelius to really have an opinion.

I'd also like to second Will's thought of hoping, if elected, Obama reaches across to the conservatives for at least some of his staff. All this us against them BS is getting old.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Willravel
I'm afraid that's incorrect. The 12th Amendment says that anybody who is eligible for the presidency under Article II of the Constitution is eligible for the vice presidency. Bill Clinton is a natural born citizen over 35. The 22nd doesn't apply, of course.

So yes, he can't be elected to the presidency more than twice, but he can serve as vice president and can even assume the job if the president has to leave office. He just can't be elected at the end of his final term.
I believe this is correct.
__________________
I used to drink to drown my sorrows, but the damned things have learned how to swim- Frida Kahlo

Vice President Starkizzer Fan Club

Last edited by Tully Mars; 06-04-2008 at 06:14 PM.. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
Tully Mars is offline  
Old 06-04-2008, 06:29 PM   #26 (permalink)
Junkie
 
loquitur's Avatar
 
Location: NYC
Too bad there's no way to bring back Lloyd Bentsen.
loquitur is offline  
Old 06-04-2008, 06:37 PM   #27 (permalink)
sufferable
 
girldetective's Avatar
 
Biden, Gore, Edwards, Clinton, with Nancy Pelosi. What a dream admin that would be for Obama and for us.

A girl can dream.
__________________
As far as possible, without surrender, be on good terms with all persons...be cheerful; strive for happiness - Desiderata
girldetective is offline  
Old 06-04-2008, 07:09 PM   #28 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Here is the relevant text for the 12th amendment

Quote:
But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States
This would be a legal grey area.
Rekna is offline  
Old 06-04-2008, 07:13 PM   #29 (permalink)
... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.
 
Willravel's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rekna
Here is the relevant text for the 12th amendment
As I said, that only refers to Article II:
Quote:
No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
Anyone who is 35 and natural born is eligible.

Loq, looking at you for back-up.
Willravel is offline  
Old 06-04-2008, 07:56 PM   #30 (permalink)
All important elusive independent swing voter...
 
jorgelito's Avatar
 
Location: People's Republic of KKKalifornia
Hillary would be a good choice. I think she is savvy enough and definitely smart enough to adapt to wearing the hat of the VP for the rest of the campaign. Plus she could be very valuable in the White House

Lieberman would be interesting too unless McCain picks him up.

I am against the idea of Bill Richardson as VP just to create an all "color" ticket or to pick up Latino voters. Why not choose Norm Mineta to gain Asian American voters or Lieberman to get Jewish voters or Jesse Jackson to get black voters? The so-called Latino demographic is NOT monolithic and is very diverse. In fact quite a few of my Latino friends do not even view Bill Richardson as being a "real Latino" (whatever that means) nor would they vote for him solely on that criteria alone.
jorgelito is offline  
Old 06-04-2008, 08:03 PM   #31 (permalink)
Easy Rider
 
flstf's Avatar
 
Location: Moscow on the Ohio
I think the dream ticket would be a nightmare for Obama. Too much press coverage of Hillary and Bill instead of his agenda.
flstf is offline  
Old 06-04-2008, 09:47 PM   #32 (permalink)
Human
 
SecretMethod70's Avatar
 
Administrator
Location: Chicago
jorgelito: if anyone has said Richardson would be good "just to create an all "color" ticket or to pick up Latino voters" then please point it out. What has been said is, simply, that one possible benefit of Richardson could be the Latino vote. There are a number of other reasons which are, obviously, much more valid that make Richardson a good option. Perhaps you should read a little bit about all of Richardson's experience.

And Lieberman? Are you kidding? He's a pariah - and with good reason. Giving any thought to Lieberman as Obama's VP is about as big of a waste as thinking about the possibility of Kucinich. Now, McCain/Lieberman...won't happen, but that's something that wouldn't surprise me. I look forward to the end of Lieberman's term when his constituents are almost certain to fix the mistake they made.

roachboy: Before the campaign turned ugly, I also thought both Obama and Clinton were interesting options, though there are a number of policy issues where I prefer Obama over Clinton and, from what I can tell, I prefer his style of leadership as well. But that's just the point: before the campaign turned ugly. The one good thing - the only good thing - that has come out of this ugly campaign has been that it showed a side of Clinton which has convinced me, unequivocally, that she does not have the character to be president of the United States. The repeated moving of goalposts, the misleading metrics by which she declared victory, the disingenuous and hypocritical appeals to count every vote (while not counting every vote in her own numbers)...she went far beyond what I can forgive as "politics" and landed squarely in the farcical realm of Baghdad Bob. And this is all not even to mention the other reasons she wouldn't be a good VP choice: Bill, the personality conflicts that would come up between Obama, Clinton, and Clinton, both Clinton's ability to steal the spotlight whenever they can, whether they consciously intend to or not...

I'd be happy to see her in a cabinet position and contributing her intelligense in that way. As for VP? No thank you.
__________________
Le temps détruit tout

"Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

Last edited by SecretMethod70; 06-04-2008 at 09:49 PM..
SecretMethod70 is offline  
Old 06-04-2008, 10:00 PM   #33 (permalink)
... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.
 
Willravel's Avatar
 
Remember, Smeth, two questions were asked:
Who is your choice (or a personal dream ticket)?
Who do you think Obama will choose?
Willravel is offline  
Old 06-04-2008, 11:00 PM   #34 (permalink)
Lennonite Priest
 
pan6467's Avatar
 
Location: Mansfield, Ohio USA
I'd like to see Sherrod Brown or Oho Gov. Strickland take the nod. Edwards, Webb. But in all honesty, the VP is just such a figurehead that it really doesn't mean that much in my voting determination. Tho any of those 4 may at least have me looking at Obama and considering him.

Realistically, I think just as with McCain the French Fry, the VP candidate has already been chosen by the power people in the party.

I really do not have see much to be hopeful for in either candidate nor do I have faith either will do much.

In fact, that maybe why the field was truly so weak on both sides. You have an unfavorable war, a dying economy, optimism is at a low and a country with its people so far indebted to the rest of the world that we may see a serious problem.

Now, blaming Bush will only work for so long, especially if for those voting for Obama believing he can save the country.

I see a severe reverse in 2 years in Congess and an extremely unpopular president who has lost all faith of the people.

I wish I could be optimistic again.... but I just don't see a positive change coming.
__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"
pan6467 is offline  
Old 06-05-2008, 03:01 AM   #35 (permalink)
Banned
 
Seems irrelevant.... the competing candidate is so far gone that, barring aggressive election tampering or a declaration of martial law by the current administration, any democratic ticket should be sufficient...

We "get it", John mcCain:
Quote:
http://www.politico.com/blogs/jonath...d_staffer.html
June 02, 2008
Categories: McCain

McCain hires Weekly Standard staffer


Michael Goldfarb, online guru at the Weekly Standard, has taken a leave of absence from his post at the magazine to become deputy communications director for McCain.


Standard chief Bill Kristol announced the move on their blog.

In his new role, Goldfarb will use his grasp of the rightosphere to help drive the McCain message online and will also lend a hand in writing campaign materials. He'll focus especially on the rapid response element of a campaign that is already being fought hour by hour.

A source at the magazine said that when Goldfarb announced his move at a staff meeting,
Kristol joked that the conservative writer was being "detailed" to the McCain campaign.

VRWC, indeed.
Quote:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblog...ell_on_ira.asp

....Pam Hess, the UPI reporter who gave us this extremely moving and persuasive glimpse of the liberal case for the war in Iraq, asked if timetables for withdrawal "somehow infringe on the president's powers as commander in chief?" Mitchell's less than persuasive answer: "Congress is a coequal branch of government...the framers did not want to have one branch in charge of the government." True enough, but they sought an energetic executive with near dictatorial power in pursuing foreign policy and war. So no, the Constitution does not put Congress on an equal footing with the executive in matters of national security.

Posted by Michael Goldfarb on April 11, 2007 02:55 PM
host is offline  
Old 06-05-2008, 03:03 AM   #36 (permalink)
Living in a Warmer Insanity
 
Tully Mars's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: Yucatan, Mexico
Lieberman? Seriously Lieberman. Man, I don't see that happening.

I watched a couple shows yesterday afternoon. It became more and more apparent as the day went on that Hillary was being given the boot, so to speak. I was a little shocked when someone did a break down of the time line of the primaries. Five months ago? Really, probably because of the long time they spent campaigning prior to any actual voting, it seemed to me like at least a year. But I remember watching those returns from Iowa and still seeing Hillary as a positive option. However by the time Obama went on a multi state terror and then her reaction I just couldn't understand her anymore. Seriously she really finished hard and put up a lot of numbers in a lot of states but by the time she did that it was mathematically over. By that time she needed like 70% of all votes to get the needed delegates. Her staff, Bill and herself running around yelling about how there's no problem, we're going strong, she going to win was a little surreal. I kept think did all these people fail math? I was also struck by her campaigns seemingly lack of understanding of exactly how Democrats primaries worked. From the outside looking in it appeared they had no plan after super Tuesday. I read a quote from one of her top guys (Mark Penn?) who seemed to think they'd win California and get all of it's delegates. That's not how it works, this should not have been news to her campaign. By the time her campaign went into "kitchen sink" mode I no longer saw her in a positive light. Now watching her try to leverage her power and not concede when all the contests were over I really see her as a negative, no longer simply not positive- but completely negative. It now appears several members of her inner circle had to push her and force her to accept it's over. When was she thinking she might concede? Late Jan. 2009? Watching Terry McAuliffe introduce her Tuesday night as the "next President of the United Sates I immediately thought "you guys get CNN, right?"

So basically in five months I've gone from seeing Hillary as a positive force and decent leader to an undisciplined and possibly incompetent leader. At this point I do not see her on any short list as VP. But five months ago I could have seen her as the next President.
__________________
I used to drink to drown my sorrows, but the damned things have learned how to swim- Frida Kahlo

Vice President Starkizzer Fan Club
Tully Mars is offline  
Old 06-05-2008, 03:26 AM   #37 (permalink)
Banned
 
Tully, the whole thing is surreal, and it has looked that way to me since I watched Nixon board AF-1, babbling about his mother....on his way out of Washington, for that last time....then unelected Jerry Ford is suddenly president....followed by Carter's triumphant quest for the presidency, quickly turning to a decline that emboldened Teddy Kennedy to challenge him in '80, followed by the ridiculousness and incomprehensiveness of "Bedtime for Bonzo" star turned president Reagan, quickly shot, then recovered, then babbling about "Star Wars", followed by Fawn Hall's emergence as an Iran Conra hearings witness, followed by Dan Quayle, a heartbeat away from the presidency, followed by Clinton, by Monica, by impeachment, by Gore withdrawing his concession to Bush on the day after the 2000 election, followed by the Supremes giving Bush the presidency, followed by 9/11, and then by "Shock and Awe", in Iraq, then Abu Ghraib, the idea of 12 hours long lines at the polls in Ohio, voters wating in the rain, we were told, who were voting in a plurality for....Bush? Followed by a candidate with the middle name "Hussein", a last name so similar to "Osama", overtaking Hillary, even as two of his three "spiritual advisors" made him look like a man who was a poor judge....of spiritual advisors...... All of it nuts.....disconnected, implausible, all of my adult life.

McCain seems bonkers, as do all of the republicans.....ever since they saw nothing wrong with Reagan, or the Quayle pick by Bush, heavily behind as he was in the polls, and overtaking Dukakis, in spite of it.

Consider Nixon's 1972 near sweep, against George McGovern, after so much protest against Nixon, his war, and the draft, during the most liberal period in American society, before or since.

I don't understand it, but I suspect it comes about because most voters are uninformed, driven by fear, prejudices, greed, or by attraction to perceived charismatic candidates.

Last edited by host; 06-05-2008 at 03:30 AM..
host is offline  
Old 06-05-2008, 03:46 AM   #38 (permalink)
 
abaya's Avatar
 
Location: Iceland
Quote:
Originally Posted by host
I don't understand it, but I suspect it comes about because most voters are uninformed, driven by fear, prejudices, greed, or by attraction to perceived charismatic candidates.
Well, that would pretty much summarize it. They're mostly average humans, after all.

What I don't get, though, is when some of the most intelligent people I know still chose to support Bush and even the war (back when it started). I was teaching US History to 11th graders in 2002-03, with another teacher in his 40s as my mentor. He was an INCREDIBLY smart man, knew FAR more about American history and how to teach it to hormonal teenagers than I will ever understand... I truly respect him at all levels. And yet, he was still 100% pro-war and pro-Bush, and felt it was the "right" thing to do. He is not evangelical (though he is a staunch Lutheran--Scandinavian roots), not really religious in that sense, one of the least prejudiced, fearful, gullible people I know... and he's chosen to make his career out of teaching, he lives a humble life, not greedy... so I don't get it. Eventually, he did come around and say that he thought the war was no longer a good idea (after some years), but I really never understood how a man like him could have thought it was a good idea in the first place.
__________________
And think not you can direct the course of Love;
for Love, if it finds you worthy, directs your course.

--Khalil Gibran
abaya is offline  
Old 06-05-2008, 04:06 AM   #39 (permalink)
 
dc_dux's Avatar
 
Location: Washington DC
Congressional Quarterly has made it a spectator sport.

Choose the best VP candidate in head-to-head matchups of 32-person field:
VP Madness
The people's choice to be revealed on July 1.

View the Republican results.

At the very least, the CQ attempt at gaming the selection process provides snapshot profiles of the potential running mates for both Obama and McCain.
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire

Last edited by dc_dux; 06-05-2008 at 04:21 AM.. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
dc_dux is offline  
Old 06-05-2008, 04:34 AM   #40 (permalink)
Living in a Warmer Insanity
 
Tully Mars's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: Yucatan, Mexico
Quote:
Originally Posted by abaya
Well, that would pretty much summarize it. They're mostly average humans, after all.

What I don't get, though, is when some of the most intelligent people I know still chose to support Bush and even the war (back when it started). I was teaching US History to 11th graders in 2002-03, with another teacher in his 40s as my mentor. He was an INCREDIBLY smart man, knew FAR more about American history and how to teach it to hormonal teenagers than I will ever understand... I truly respect him at all levels. And yet, he was still 100% pro-war and pro-Bush, and felt it was the "right" thing to do. He is not evangelical (though he is a staunch Lutheran--Scandinavian roots), not really religious in that sense, one of the least prejudiced, fearful, gullible people I know... and he's chosen to make his career out of teaching, he lives a humble life, not greedy... so I don't get it. Eventually, he did come around and say that he thought the war was no longer a good idea (after some years), but I really never understood how a man like him could have thought it was a good idea in the first place.

I've known people like this. I know lots of people who still think the war was a good idea. Seemingly intelligent people who simply think it was a good idea. It boggles my mind. But the number of people I know who still support it has certainly waned lately. I'm beginning to wonder just how many of these folks simply can not and will not admit they were wrong.

End threadjack.
__________________
I used to drink to drown my sorrows, but the damned things have learned how to swim- Frida Kahlo

Vice President Starkizzer Fan Club
Tully Mars is offline  
 

Tags
obama, president, vice

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:31 AM.

Tilted Forum Project

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360