On Demand
Call-In: Obama's Veep
Thursday, June 05, 2008
Only Barack Obama gets to decide who fills out his Presidential ticket -- but that won't stop the rest of us from chiming in. Would Hillary Clinton take the job, and is that the best route to party unity? If Bill Richardson helps Obama with Latino voters, could they build a winning coalition without working-class whites?
Call us with your opinion and comment below!
- About the Brian Lehrer Show »
- Staff Bios »
- Contact Us »
- Tapes and Transcripts »
- Latest Episode »
- Show Archive »
Features & Series
Podcast
Stay up to date.
Subscribe to the Podcast
YOU PRODUCE The Brian Lehrer Show
Be a listener-producer with facts, questions and people you'd like to hear on the air.
More
The Brian Lehrer Show Scrapbook
Visit the scrapbook for daily photos and miscellany from The Brian Lehrer Show.
More
Shop at Amazon!
The Brian Lehrer Show picks
Start your Amazon shopping on WNYC.org and a portion of your total purchase goes to WNYC.
More
Comments
Refresh
from The New York Times:"We pledged to support her to the end," Representative Charles B. Rangel, a New York Democrat who has been a patron of Mrs. Clinton since she first ran for the Senate, said in an interview. "Our problem is not being able to determine when the hell the end is."
Apparently the end is Saturday. And per Shields and Brooks on Jim Lehrer's show, there is no-way-in-Hades he can put her on the ticket as vp after her behavior. Which, for many of us, means that our long national nightmare of dynastic succession is over.
We hereby gratefully hand the mantle to the new, and incredibly talented, kid. Barack: it's not just America - you've captured the hopes of people around the world for a more thoughtful, less warlike, less corrupt America. Don't let 'em down.
Hillary Clinton has now been liberated in a way Obama will never be. She can go out into the world and be her own person now, with little or no media scrutiny, with much less pressure. She can get some rest and heal. And then explore where her various talents take her... it's the beginning of a great, and no doubt more enjoyable, adventure than Obama is about to undertake. She had my support as first lady, and as senator, but she lost it during this campaign. Now that it's over, I wish her the best. And there's no reason for her not to be nominated for Supreme Court Justice as soon as there is an opening. I have every confidence that she would excel in the position.
We keep talking about Hillary, but I haven't heard as much about Bill lately. How does the way this primary ended change his future? Can everything be repaired in the general election?
Hillary is like the drunk at a party who won't leave when the host wants to go to bed.
No one should be surprised by Lady Macbeth's selfishness. She's not going to concede because she is hoping to God Obama implodes before November, and then Hill-Bill can get back to the Oval Office (remember, they still have the White House silverware they ripped off on January 20, 2001).
I congratulate Barack Obama for running a brilliant campaign. His folks have been very focused on their goal and never wavered. Let's hope the focus is able to be re-trained on to governing should he actually claim the White House. I think much of this race shows that people truly do vote their passions. There were several other candidates whom I thought were far more qualified than either of these two. I worry that this will devolve into a cult of personality. There is a similar phenomenon with McCain. We shall see whose brand prevails.
I never bought the mega-narrative that Hillary was this front runner. Anyone who watches these races over years knows that when someone emerges as a front runner early, especially before votes are actually cast, that person's brand usually burns out early. I was surprised that she lasted as long as she did.
I think the Democratic Party needs to take a very hard look at itself. It claims the moral high ground. I'm not sure that it can really claim that ground legitimately. It is easy to pat yourself on the back for not being racist/sexist when you are confronted with someone who is attractive, not so easy when the person is not so attractive.
I celebrate the fact that many beaten down people in whose midst I live, are feeling hugely empowered by this candidacy.
Obama never lost the lead in the pledged delegates during the entire primary. If folks want to argue that in the end he didn't necessarily win the popular vote and claim how undemocratic the pledged delegate system is, please don't forget the dozen or so states with caucuses. Obama's campaign was excellent in the fact that some "nobody" from Illinois was able to sideswipe the current heads of the Democratic party, whose name was known in every state. He is not my first choice but the strategy of his campaign took was a different (and successful) route to the nomination.
I don't know what being 'Negro' or being 'Females' has to do with being and effecive President.
It's a somewhat interesting footnote to history- someting on the scale of the word RADAR spelling and reading the same way backwards as forward... certainly nothing more than that!
In any event- America is not going to elect an always angry Michelle O-Ba-Ma to be it's 'First Lady'!
He ran a great campaign and is a special candidate, once in a generation (or more) type. But he was greatly helped by the failure of the Hillary campaign to plan for post February 5. Hillary said "I'm in it for the long run. It won't be a very long run, it will be over by February 5." That was the fatal flaw of her campaign.
He then went on to win 11 straight or something and she then mounted a furious, impressive comeback but it was too late and she never had a chance, like the team that is down 30-3 at halftime but then makes it a respectable 40-30 finish.
I agree with Chris O. The one thing that gnaws at me is her Iraq war vote. If she doesn't vote for it does Obama even run.
I'm one of many thousands of Obama volunteers, and at an election party on Tuesday night, I clapped along with everyone else for Mrs. Clinton, trying to keep a positive spirit and give her the chance to save face. Mrs. Clinton's underlying threat was not lost to us and there was palpable discomfort and disappointment in the air.
I respectfully submit that a true leader of the highest order would have had a better instinct on how to leave the race than Senator Clinton has shown, and wouldn't have had to ask everybody what they think. It will always be remembered that she had to be told to leave the race. But I will be smiling and clapping for her on Saturday.
OK- How about this?
O-Ba-Ma divorces Michelle-
Hillary divorces 'Wild Bill'-
O-Ba-Ma MARRIES Hillary-
...and America gets the first inter-racial marries couple in the White House (which would have to be renamed appropriately, or course-)
In this scenario- everybody wins!
[] O-Ba-Ma get to be President-
[] Hillary return to the 'White House' as First Lady (and co-President!)-
[] Wild Bill is 'free at last- free at last!' to pursue his sexual propensities in his waning years as the first black president-rock star Sax(Sex) player-
[]...and dear sweet Michelle will then really have SOMETHING to be angry about!
Gee- sounds like 'destiny-fulfilled' to me...
Obama's Veep: MICHELLE!
It may be crazy, but throughout the campaign, I've been struck by similarities to the Bush and Dean campaigns of 2004.
Clinton ran a very Dean-like campaign. It started with an air of inevitability. It was stocked with staffers who seem to gloat on their own accomplishments rather than their candidate's. And in the end, it was a campaign that was derailed by its own hubris.
And while it might not at first seem very flattering--and thankfully he's avoided the dissembling, the fear-mongering, and the slash and burn tactics--Obama's does resemble Bush's. He's more disciplined with his message. Much more organized on the ground. And his staff has had one laser beam-like focus: winning.
Let's hope that this is the only comparison you can make of the two.
Jesse, this discussion was *supposed* to focus on the Democratic nominee's vice presidential choice. Not misguided and transparent hyperbole. Thanks.
With that said, I have always been impressed with Bill Richardson's demeanor and personality. He just has always come across as easy-going and competent, along with a willingness to speak his mind. I would be quite happy if he was selected to be in Barack's corner.
Re: the HRC as VP talk...
Stop the madness! It is NOT going to happen.
Once again in a world of important stories the media dwells on what they have decided is the most important story.
How about a segment on McCain and how he's a walking gaffe machine?
this is the most amazing BS i have ever heard and I am ready to quit being a democrat, even as my grandfather was a party elder. Hillary delivered the popular vote - the two were a hair's breadth apart - but she was treated like a Republican - this was decided from the top and that is not supposed to be how the Democratic party operates.
And check out taylor marsh's website if you think Obama is sleaze free - we will only get this info outside of MSM to which NPR is connected.
16 - Chris,
I have to disagree especially with the description of the Dean campaign and comparing it to Hillary. Dean was a dark horse in 2004. Sure, he had a great 2003 but it was Edwards, Kerry, Gephardt that had the party - Dean was bashing the Democratic Party for supporting Bush's war, supporting Bush's tax cuts, etc. He was the consummate outsider, she was the consummate insider.
And with Bush, he was the prohibitive favorite like Clinton, and he ran that way. I see Obama's campaign as much more like Dean's, only correcting his mistakes and being a much smoother, more effective politician.
Obama and
CLINTON
Obama should run with Edwards. He would reel in all the working class white votes!
This is my girlfriends prediction, and just might be crazy enough to work.
CAROLINE KENNEDY.
Senator Joseph Biden.
(only anti-Webb because I think it is unlikely two Democrats will be elected to the senate in Virginia in the same year)
I strongly believe Obama's best choice for VP would be Jim Webb. He has an incredible personal story, including incredible heroics in Vietnam; he's bright; bipartisan; well-liked; Appalachian; Southern; remarkably non-elite; unquestionably patriotic; an expert on matters military; possessed of executive experience; and from a state (VA) that Obama has a shot at and that could put the race out of reach were the Dems to take it.
I see John Edwards as a strategic choice for Obama -- he'll definitely give Obama the white male legitimacy/comfort factor that a lot of Americans are unfortunately going to need before they could ever actually vote for a black man.
I think if he chose Hillary (assumignt hat would ever happen) or Bill Richardson, that might be diversity overload for so many Americans who just can't handle that kind of departure from white male dominance in office.
Obama/Webb
I would like to see John Edwards also because of the working class white roots and his populist message against poverty and health care issues.
Obama - Edwards!!!!!
Jim Webb, balance out the liberalism and give him some foreign policy cred.
John Edwards
EDWARDS!
OBAMA - WEBB
I supported Hillary Clinton during the primarys but I don't think she is a good complement to an Obama candidacy. Jim Webb is a southern white male w/strong military credentials.
I think Bill Richardson is better qualified for the presidency but is probably too soft spoken - might be a good VP -
NOT Clinton.
NOT Webb.
Who? Kathleen Sebelius.
Extremely popular second-term Democratic governor of a red state. White. Woman. Catholic. Strong executive experience. Strong on domestic issues -- notably the environment. Opposes capital punishment. Opposed state constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. Strong on gun control.
Politically and temperamentally compatible with Obama.
Great optics for many Hillary supporters -- 60; stylish but not too slick; with a confident blend of political savvy and Midwestern common sense.
MARK WARNER
Apparently Webb has female trouble, and Obama does right now because of Hillary and understandable resentment on that front, despite his honorbale behavior.
How about:
Nancy Pelosi
Bill Richardson
John Edwards
Wesley Clark
I am a Hillary supporter and want her to the Vice Presidential candidate.
Hi, I called in yesterday and mentioned Obama should name Hillary just to keep her out of the way. Imagine if McCain named Hillary? You thought I was joking but if you think about it, I believe if McCain chose Hillary, it would lock up the presidency for McCain.
Webb barely beat George Allen even with the macaca handicap. He's almost as much of a loser as Edwards.
Brian polls say VA is tied as of now
chestinee look at the big picture!
Hillary Cliinton as VP is not a good idea. Unfortunately she's been troublesome to Obama's campaign by trying to discredit his trustworthiness and challenges to his experience. She has displayed a disregard for his presence, almost. These things would make for an antagonism between the two, even if one-sided, with her in the position as VP. She has proven that she cannot let go--or doesn't know when to let go--and this could cause problems moving ahead if she were to disagree with any policies he wants to promote. It's not a dream ticket, it's a nightmare!!
I agree with Barbara's choice of Webb, second Edwards.
And the gushy love affair between Lehrer, New York, and Obama continues...
Oh... he speaks so well!
Such a great smile!
Oh I love you so much mmm mm mm mmm *smooch smooch*!
WNYAirAmerica!
Obama/Gov. Napolitiano (d-AZ)
She would delvier Arizona from under McCain.
Barbara Boxer!
It's difficult for me to take Democrats seriously- because they are seriously delusional!
Webb? Edwards? Biden? Clinton?
All guaranteed losers! (What a joke!)
General Wesley Clark. He was a great candidate 8 years ago, and all his military experience is equal to McCain, perhaps making people feel more secure about the ticket.
Jim Webb would an EXCELLENT choice, given his national security/foreign policy credentials, ex Secretary of the Navy, Marine, etc.. AND, very important in a campaign: he's an intellectual and VERY articulate..
townhalls? yes of course, Obama would do MUCH BETTER than McCain..
Frances
Lieberman endorsed McCain and is actively campaigning for him.
Joe Lieberman should just move to Israel, to where his first allegiance lies.
Governor Kathleen Sebelius she's intelligent, capable and popular. Also Midwest gets opened up.
Webb
Hillary gets nobody and nothing excites the right like beating up on the clintons
Edwards is a fraud. His wife is more legitimate than him.
Let's not go nuts here.
Obama need a choice that is as original as his campaign. After hearing a number of interviews with Chuck Hagel I have to sqy he is a great choice. He represents the post partisanship that Barack has proprosed. ANd Hagel has shown that he puts values over party loyalty and personal ambition. And he undermines McCain's touting his Viet Nam experience.
Barbara Boxer. VP is president of the Senate, so doesn't make sense to pick a governor. Nancy Pelosi would be great, but House Majority leader is a better position.
Good idea to pick a woman, but NOT Hillary.
brian, you've jumped the shark. did your unscientific poll really say that people wouldn't accept hillary "playing second banana to a man," or is that your tired old bias against her rearing its head again? we turned you off for many a week earlier in this race, not because we backed hillary unequivocally, but because your own opinion found its way into too many conversations on the subject.
Edwards... Is the only chance to get the white votes in the south.
Obama should make McCain his Sec of Defense.
The republicans think that Obama will look aloof, and not do well in small settings. Thats why they are picking this "small town " (read mostly white ) venue. The conventional wisdom is that Obama does not do well in small forums as he does with large crowds.
Robert
Please produce some factual evidence that Joe Liberman's first allegiance lies in Israel.
Thasnks.
Clinton still supports almost half the delegates. If she's not the VP candidate then Obama should let it be known in some way that Clinton is playing the largest role in picking the VP. It should be someone from that side of the party! That may be the only way to unite it. THat's pretty much a no brainer. . .
Kansas Gov Kathleen Sebelius 1st choice
NM Gov. Richardson 2nd choice
Obama's Campaign Manager, David Plouffe, was quoted in today's WSJ expressing interest in town hall style debate.
Colin Powell has been hinting for months that he will endorse Obama.
Except for hard-core racists, an Obama/Powell ticket would appeal to every demographic that is currently ambivalent to Obama and present a real puzzle to John McCain and the republicans.
WAKE UP CALL FOR JESSE Post #9...we haven't been "Negro" for a while now.
#59 Megan,
He was trying to be funny in that arrogant, 'stuff white people like "I swear I'm not racist"', hyper-intellectual, elitist kind of way.
Hillary has the depth and experience that Obama doesn't and she deserves the right of refusal for the position of vice president. If she does refuse she should be given some other prominent place in the administration.
Having her on the ticket would assuage a lot of hard
feelings about the way the election was taken from Hillary. She has the popular vote and it was the delegates and the organization of the youth vote that gave him the edge. He will not carry the country without at least offering her the vice presidency.
The person being proposed may become the president of the United States (God forbid) not just a figure to help win the election.
Govenor Dean would be a good choice. Senator Biden is good. Not Hillary.
Lieberman is a traitor!
and should go down in history as one.
Obama/Clinton.
Bill C. - Secretary of State
Al Gore - Head of EPA
Edwards - Domestic Policy
Powell - Secretary of Defense
No way to Jim Webb. This country does not need a misogynist in a leadership position. If Obama chooses Webb he can say goodbye to his chance for presidency.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nathaniel-bach/jim-webbs-baggage_b_103203.html
No to OBAMA/Hilary
Gov. Sebelius: she's smart, knows how to work both sides of the aisle, and unlike Mrs. Clinton, has neither baggage (like Bill) or a polarizing personality. She was the party's choice to respond to Bush's State of the Union address. A rising star.
B.R. #64
I think #51 is/was trying to be anti-Semitic..
Joe Lieberman's mongering war in the Middle east with Iran and Syria and his Middle east policy in general, and his continued support of Rev Hagy even after McCain separated himself (so we think) from him. We all know or if not look it up, what Hagy's Armagedon/Rapture scenario involves USING Israel. It's all very sick and Lieberman is there.
Al Gore would make the best VP for the following 3 reasons:
1. because he previously selected Lieberman as VP that would neutralize Lieberman's attack on Obama
2. makes it easier for Clinton supporters to join Obama's campaign since Gore was selected VP and worked with Clinton for 8 years
3. MOST IMPORTANT REASON IS - SINCE AL GORE HAS A GOOD REPORT, AND SOME CASES IS LOVED BY FOREIGN COUNTRIES, HE WOULD BE THE BEST AMBASSADOR TO RETURN USA TO PRE-BUSH STATUS IN THE WORLD.
4. HE HAS MORE POPULAR VOTES THAN GEORGE BUSH?!
ALI M. KAS
Why don't they announce a cabinet?
Makes lots of sense to you and me, it would give us more information on which to base our vote.
But people who run for president have HUGE egos. I'm sure they'd rather not even share the spotlight with a VP.
Speaking of VP, absolutely not Hillary, she deserves better, i.e. Sec'y of State or Defense. If not that kind of position, then we need her here in NY representing us in the senate.
Here, here to the caller Chris!
He is Bi-Racial we need to adapt that term in this country. He does not NEED Hillary to win this, and JESSE, now that's "cranky" HRC.
OBAMA/Powell maybe
OBAMA/EDWARDS maybe
(1) I agree w/caller who said Obama / Clinton had to "hide" their respective selves to appeal to broader groups. That's always true in compromise, but it's ALSO TRUE when change is occurring ... I was struck while walking in to work today from the subway that 100 years ago women DID NOT wear pants. That "Bloomer" woman who "invented" bloomers ... well ... that was an aberration. One cannot always "See" change while one is in the midst of it.
(2) I would LOVE, dearly love, to see an Obama / Clinton ticket. I will vote Dem, no question there ... but I think Clinton's strengths complement Obama's ... anyone else will be just too weak to face, essentially alone, the prejudice that Obama will face ... "white" America (I grew up in Pittsburgh, I _know_ in my bones, Hillary's "constituency") WANTS to believe in the best ... but is VERY VERY MUCH afraid, and it is VERY VERY easy to retreat into prejudicial statements. It will be a long time before gender / race changes ... SOME folks are still getting over German / Irish / Italian / Asian issues ... race / gender are much deeper. Obama (and Clinton) NEED EACH OTHER because they do profoundly understand this.
I agree on Gen Wesley Clark. Reassuring to the working class white males.
BUT While I'm here, how are Hillary Supporters, and I voted for her, going to let McCain be elected? He says he wants gov out of our lives, but he is anti choice, anti birth control, and the next Pres will appoint one, two, or more Supreme Court Justices. One more conservative appointments and not only are we back to back-alley abortions we will lose civil liberties as well.
Please get passed your disappointment, and see the large, scarey picture.
Robert
lol
pretty week and fumbling response
So all Hagee's millions of supporters put Israel ahead of US? nonsense
Supporting Israel, or any other country does not equate with having allegance to that country more than America
Neither Hagee nor Lieberman's support of Israel says anything about their relative allegance ---
but I understand that you're trying to make insinuations about allegnce in order to smear Liberman...
You'll have to try harder - classis anti--Semitic canards don't really work...
MERRIAM-WEBSTER
-------------------------------------------
Main Entry: Ne·gro
Pronunciation: \ˈnē-(ˌ)grō\
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural Negroes
Etymology: Spanish or Portuguese, from negro black, from Latin nigr-, niger
Date: 1555
sometimes offensive : a member of a race of humankind native to Africa and classified according to physical features (as dark skin pigmentation)
— Negro adjective sometimes offensive
— ne·groid \ˈnē-ˌgrȯid\ adjective or noun often capitalized sometimes offensive
— Ne·gro·ness \-grō-nəs\ noun sometimes offensive
------------------------------------------
I don't know exactly when the word NEGRO became 'sometimes offensive'...
and exactly WHEN are those 'sometimes'?!
Is 'Caucasian' also 'sometimes offensive'??!
(What nonsense!)
BRIAN & CALLERS: The term Black American is correct but He is BI-RACIAL, my gosh I wish I could get through and get this across the air-waves!!
Date: 1555
sometimes offensive : a member of a race of humankind native to Africa and classified according to physical features (as dark skin pigmentation)
— Negro adjective sometimes offensive
— ne·groid \ˈnē-ˌgrȯid\ adjective or noun often capitalized sometimes offensive ...
OFFENSIVE IS THE KEY WORD HERE!
But since that is okay with you is CALIFANO spic or wop? are either of those polite?
see how ignorant it sounds jesse?
MERRIAM-WEBSTER (written/developed by a caucasian.
I think people should remember that the presidential race is politics and Obama is a politician (a very good one!). I norder to get elected, a strategy of standing for just bakc people will not work. He must bring together all sorts of factions to get elected.
In response to the caller who sounded indignant about Obama's "race neutral" stance, I wonder why race neutrality is such a bad thing. If we are ever to move beyond racism in this country, we need to begin to think about all the other things that make up a person other than race. Of course institutional racism is an issue that needs to be addressed, but it is just another issue that every candidate should be expressing opinions on (just as they should be speaking out about the war and the economy) regardless of the race of the candidate. I think it is hypocritical to hold Obama to a different standard than the White candidates because he is Black.
This is why we need true change, even the immigrants have developed a disrespect and mild? hatred four the Black American.
I was a Clinton supporter. I have always been impressed with Senator Clinton's work in the Senate. For example, a friend back from service in Iraq saw directly over the years how the men under him were helped by Clinton's tenacious work to help secure better medical care for returning soldiers.
I would actually be quite sad to see Clinton take a subordinate role as VP. I'd much prefer for Obama and Clinton to work out a Supreme Court Justice Clinton agreement. Her experience as a lawyer and law maker would serve our nation well.
And I would be very disappointed to see any of the former primary candidates on the ticket. Let's make a fresh new start with a fresh new ticket.
Ed Rendell has a populist appeal, a folksy approach. Having lived in Philly at the tail end of his tenure as mayor, and working in marketing the city's tourism, it was clear his appeal was across the board and huge. One of the few things the city agreed on was their love of Ed Rendell. Now as PA Governor, he has a record and reputation to elevate him to VP status. He would be able to bring in voters where Obama was weak in the primaries and in the polls. He'd provide a well-rounded, balanced ticket.
I thought Obama's speech at AIPAC yesterday was very predictable and very telling. 'Our support for Israel is unshakable' etc. For a member of the rest of the human race (that's a 'non-american' for all you Americans) having a Republican or a Democrat in the White House is very much the other side of the same coin, nothing really has changed.
What irritates me is how candidate after candidate never bothers to connect the Israel-Palestine issue with the greivances of the entire Muslim world. It is simply a microcosm of the larger problem that every US administration has actively decided to avoid.
So you can vote in anyone you like from any race other than white if it makes you feel better, but at the end of the day it's just a token gesture and it won't change the fact that the United States is very insulated from the happenings in the rest of the world.
Obama like the many candidates/presidents before him will do what they've always done: appease whichever audience that they're talking without understanding the sheer hypocracy of the act.
So if you think you like him now, let him get into power and then ask yourself the same question.
He definitely need someone with a military background. Clark sounds good.
correction: for (post86)
Jessie Califano:
Did you see the "sometimes offensive" reference in that definition you posted? I'll bet you that if you go outside right now and and call 10 black people "Negros," you will at best get 10 "he said what?" looks. At best.
I just cannot read beyond "takes the reigns," which is meaningless nonsense. He "takes the reins," as in takes control. It's an equestrian metaphor.
I think strategically, Edwards is his best bet. He could bring in many, many votes, especially from that "white working class" that everyone seems to think Obama can't court.
As for a more experienced VP, Edwards is not necessarily the best choice. Richardson for his foreign policy experience, Clark for his military background. I think Clark would make many indecisive security-focused independents feel more comfortable.
Chuck Hagel. This should be a strategic decision to sure up Obama's weaknesses and attack McCain's strengths. Maverick? Crossing party lines at this point in America's decline as an empire trumps anything McCain has ever done. Geography? There's a lot of "hard working white Americans in Nebraska." While Hillary Clinton ducked sniper fire in Bosnia, Hagel's military bonafides are slightly more impressive. Square jaw, crew cut, flag pin, christian? Check. This would be an example of a strategic choice as opposed to the emotional choice that the irrational Hillary for VP crowd has been making. Bill will never release his Library funding sources, so it's a moot point anyway.
Edwards couldn't win his own state and would make the ticket too intimidating to American's phobia of educated attractive people who don't speak down to them. Biden--great attack dog but it's hard to keep the attack dog from biting the mailman. Dodd would be a great choice if he had a womb, was hispanic, or was from say...Kansas. Richardson? If he were Cuban instead of Mexican and could deliver FL...si. He'll have to settle for Sec./State however. The women candidates being floated lack the credentials of the men mentioned above. The absence of foreign policy/military experience, etc. McCain's selection of a woman as VP will completely backfire. Obama/Hagel 2008. Because it's the best strategic move.
JESSE: I did see the "sometimes" and those ten will without a doubt be 65 to 70 years old...please approach a young Black American during your survey and call him/her a negro, and then come back and tell me the results of your little test.
by the by did you see my question? CALIFANO, spic or wop? look those up in your webster please. thanks.
Obama should pick John Edwards for VP and Hillary should be ambassador to Iceland.
Joe Lieberman is a traitor!
Am i also an anti-semite megan?(post 79)
or just an American with an opinion.
He was Vp candidate in 2000 and since then he has left the party, supported republicans and supported the war mongering in the Middle East even attempts to go to war with Iran. Which i'm sure the Israel-y government would love for us to do.
I do not believe Sen. Obama owes Mrs. Clinton any guarantees (a judgeship, a VP slot). None. If she is really a team player, a truly loyal Democrat, she will get behind the ticket and make sure that a Democrat gets elected. I read this stuff about not wanting to see her take a "subordinate position" and it truly irritates me. After the fear-based campaign she ran - the "three in the morning" ad, the "hard working white people" comment, Bill's "fairy tale" rant, to name a few - she deserves no favors from the nominee.
I never bought the line that Hillary was evil.
Nonsense.
I am now supporting Obama and beginning to think that Bill Richardson would be an excellent pick for Vice President.
I agree w/posts #96 and #98.
I'd go for Wesley Clark. He is a clear thinker and has the military credentials to balance McCain's, which Richardson lacks although in every other way Richardson would be wonderful. (Or Gore but I doubt he would be willing.)
But if the VP is not Hillary Clinton let's hope she doesn't try to start a third party. That would throw the election to the GOP again. And she has shown herself so unrealistic in her thinking she just might. The night Obama won she was asking for input like it had never occurred to her at all that she might not win even though the handwriting had been clearly written on the wall for weeks.
Leave a Comment
Please stay on topic, be civil, and be brief.
1 | 2 | Next | Back to EpisodeEmail addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments. Names are displayed with all comments. WNYC reserves the right to edit any comments posted on this site. Please read the WNYC.org Comment Guidelines before posting.