In light of yesterday's events I'd like to congratulate Clinton on winning in Indiana. She has run a vigorous campaign, and I hope she continues in the primary through the rest of the contests. That being said, I hope the tone of the campaign improves.
I feel that the best possible outcome for the country at this point is the ticket I describe above. But let's examine VP candidates and see where this leaves us.
Please follow me below the jump..
Hillary Clinton:
Certainly the first person I think of in this situation as a potential nominee for the VP slot. She is a tenacious campaigner and brings many positives with her to a potential ticket.
I feel that she may be much more effective in the Majority Leader position in the senate rather than the VP. As Majority Leader, she will be able to move her vision much more effectively than if she is the VP. She will not only have a seat at the table, but a major hand in helping to move policy in the senate. Her campaigning for down ticket races and Democrats new strength in the new congress will put her in a position to make a real difference. Furthermore, if Obama fails, it leaves her in the best possible situation for 2012 since she will not be part of the losing ticket. In an Obama administration a Majority Leader Clinton could be a great ally.
John Edwards:
By far his appeal to working class people, and southern credentials make him a very strong choice for the VP. The drawback is that he's done that already (not sure if he'd want to do it again) and his effectiveness may be limited at the VP slot as well. His major concern, as I read it, is social equity and bringing back fairness to our country. In this measure I find the idea of an Attorney General Edwards much more appealing. He has the experience in law to make a real difference and can spearhead the initiative to bring fairness back to the way laws are applied in the United States.
Al Gore: (we wouldn't be in Iraq if it were his choice)
I feel that he has not only the experience of being Vice President, and running a vigorous and successful (technically) campaign in 2000. Furthermore, I see that he has come out of his shell politically, and is even a stronger candidate today than he was 8 years ago. He is a Nobel Laureate and Oscar winner now.
Many of us had hoped Al Gore would run this time around. I see him as a real uniter in the party. He is able to cross the divide from the Clinton supporters to Obama. His stance on Global Warming and ecology has altered the debate during a Republican administration. Imagine what he would be able to accomplish as vice president.
His name recognition and the fact he is southern will help Obama win the election. He is truly uniquely suited to the job and brings more to the table than any remaining candidate. After all he is the only one that could say something to the effect of:
"We wouldn't have been in Iraq if I had been selected in 2000" (and for that matter it would be a way to right the wrong of the 2000 election).
I will cover some of the others quickly:
Jim Webb:
There's been allot of talk about Webb being a good choice for VP. He certainly moves the correct demographic to Obama. But I feel that his seat would be almost impossible to fill. He is a popular senator in a contested state. This might make for another reason to consider him. Still, if Webb is VP then whom can we get to replace him. Remember that we need to hold the congress and the presidency in order to move out agenda forward. Webb does more for this cause in the senate than he does as VP.
Bill Richardson:
He certainly would move the Hispanic vote in the western states towards Obama. I think he would be a fine candidate. That being said, I think there are others that move other demographics more effectively than he could as VP. I do not feel he would help mend the fence with the Clinton camp as much as Al Gore might, and I see this as crucial. I would certainly think he has a place in an Obama administration, but I am not sure where.
Dick Gephardt:
I think Gephardt i a fine candidate as well. He could move people in the mountain west (although Obama already does reasonably well in this area). He has been a great ally to the party, and I am certain that he would not be forgotten in an Obama administration.
Wes Clark:
I feel Wes Clark is also a very fine choice. His military background would be a great asset to any ticket. My reservations stem from his own candidacy. I do not feel he moves people in enough numbers to justify a VP choice. However Secretary of Defense does look like a very good spot for someone with his credentials.
Kathleen Sebelius:
Of the people listed I know the least about Kathleen Sebelius. She does have executive experience in Kansas, and would probably help to put Kansas into play. The question is does she move enough people to really put it into the democratic column. Additionally I do find having her as a VP as an appealing possibility, but how to make comparisons with her to Clinton after such a long and divisive campaign. I feel it might be seen as rubbing salt in the wound and not really healing the party.
|
|
|
Permalink :: 45 Comments :: Post a Comment
|
In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.
If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.
