The anticipation surrounding the choice of running mate has been incredible. The latest headline on CNN today is just that: more anticipation.
Most of this week's buzz has been around Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh, Delaware Sen. Joe Biden and Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine.
If Obama decided to shock everybody and name Hillary Clinton, he'd recoup many, many votes which would otherwise be lost. Supposedly, millions of hard-core Hillary supporters won't vote for Obama unless she's on the ticket.
Governor Tim Kaine of Virginia would bring his important state along for the Obama ride to the White House.
Kaine also said he thinks that if Obama can take Virginia -- which hasn't voted for a Democratic president in 44 years -- then the senator from Illinois would win the White House.
I wondered if in addition to the understandable indecision associated with a choice like this, there isn't some theatrics involved. These last days it seems like this has been dragged out purposely, as if there were some benefit to prolonging the agony. Maybe the high-powered advisors behind the scenes have been masterfully manipulating the entire campaign in order to maximize voter interest. That wouldn't be such a bad thing.
What do you think?
UPDATE
CNN's Political Ticker Blog is really trying to increase the suspense.
Still no names, but man is it getting hot in this kitchen.
THE BIG UPDATE
It's Biden.
Supposedly, millions of hard-core Hillary supporters won't vote for Obama unless she's on the ticket.
ReplyDeletei don't believe that for a second. that may be the current excuse for a handful of folks who would never vote for Obama no matter what, but nobody whose opinion can be swayed at all (and certainly no millions of such people) could be swayed that way.
personally, i'd love to see Obama pick a retired general. it could bring in executive experience (which he lacks), bring in military experience (which he also lacks), and help moderate any tendencies towards military adventurism (if he ever gets conked on the head and develops some). unfortunately, the list of possible such people is short, and nobody seems to think any of them is a front runner.
Hillary would be a terrible choice. anybody who's run for the actual presidency themselves in that same year, against the candidate chosen, is guaranteed to (still) be too ambitious and too driven to be a good pick.
another possible option would be somebody further leftwards on the spectrum than he's currently playing. since he's going from the primary season to the actual election, he's predictably moving rightwards ("playing to the center"), as is customary. i hate that, personally; he was too far to the right to begin with, in my opinion. i'd like to see a veep in the political mold of Gravel or even Kuchinich, not that that's going to happen.
What's with all this talk of Chet Edwards??
ReplyDeleteI mean who had heard of him before today? And who thinks Barry has ANY hope in Carrying Texas?
Of course Only Obama could do a blunder on this scale.
I wonder if people are declining....I mean who wants to be the next Thomas Eagleton?
I discussed this with an american friend the other day. He said Obama might as well bite the bullet and choose Hillary - more votes plus a good attack dog. I said how about someone leftfield like Caroline Kennedy - he said obama is not far enough ahead in the ploos for that sort of adventurous choice. We agreed that the one thing the VP nomination wouldn't be is black ...
ReplyDeleteAnyway - we find out tomorrow.
typo central here - polls not ploos ;)
ReplyDeleteNomen, I think you're right. I got that idea from an interview that Larry King did with some woman who claimed to head up a group of 3 million die hard Hillary supporters who just wouldn't be able to bring themselves to vote for Obama. She had to be exaggerating.
ReplyDelete