GOP Nominee
Former Candidates
Huff Puff ‘n Stuff is now peddling the rumor that Obama will select Evan Bayh to be his running mate this week, says Patterico’s Pontifications:
HuffPo contributor Bil Browning (who has his own blog site “The Bilerico Project” — a little “rico” evny?) has a piece up at HuffPo making a pretty good circumstantial case that Obama will name Bayh as his running mate on Wednesday morning, in advance of the start of the Olympics.
Among his comments are that Obama has a stop planned in Elkardt, Indiana tomorrow afternoon for a campaign event, where he’ll be joined by Bayh. But the press is being told to plan on staying around until Wed afternoon/early evening even though there is nothing on Obama’s announced calendar in Indiana for later in the day on Wednesday.
Browning also says that he was just invited by an Obama campaign staffer to attend an event on Wednesday that isn’t even on the calendar, and about which the staffer could provide no information other than to say Browning would want to be there to cover it on his blog.
A leak late in the day on Tueday after Obama and and Bayh attend a rally together would be a nice set-up for a Wednesday morning announcement, which would then dominate all the press coverage through the day on Wednesday, and into Thurs.
So now we know that Bayh will be joining Obama on the trail in Indiana this week, and that Obama’s schedule remains eerily empty. Like I said yesterday, there’s no good reason for Barack Obama to be in Northern Indiana with Evan Bayh absent a Bayh selection and announcement.
August 4th, 2008 at 7:46 pm
I’ll give Barry this: he ain’t stupid. Bayh is probably the best option available to him, and is a lucky convergence of age, experience (and diversity of experience), and geographic location. I would be really appreciative if someone very familiar with IN politics could discuss whether or not a Bayh pick would cost us IN, or would hurt in MI.
August 4th, 2008 at 7:48 pm
HA! The HuffPo said Barack was a loser for moving to the right. I wonder if right-of-Barack-Bayh underscores the loser qualities in Barack.
August 4th, 2008 at 7:49 pm
Probably not enough to bring Indiana, but will hurt in Michigan.
August 4th, 2008 at 7:49 pm
So Obama is going to make his announcement soon - ok, thats fine.
McCain needs to get his marbles in order and make his pick soon too - having the VP picked basically gives the campaign the ability to run two events at the same time. McCain can’t afford to let Obama do that without being able to respond.
August 4th, 2008 at 7:50 pm
I don’t think Bayh would affect Michigan. Don’t know enough about Indiana to say. It’s looking likely that Bayh will be the pick though. Expect Obama to get a bounce in the polls this weekend and next week. It won’t matter by a month from now though. McCain should save his VP pick for the convention though.
August 4th, 2008 at 7:50 pm
I have long thought Bayh or Sebelius were his best options and, to be honest, I’m glad he chose Bayh. Don’t get me wrong, Bayh is hugely formidable geographically and ideologically, but not choosing Sebelius is the ultimate snub for Hillary supporters. We’ll see how this plays out and how it affects McCain’s decision.
August 4th, 2008 at 7:51 pm
McCain should pick Palin.
August 4th, 2008 at 7:51 pm
I also think McCain should hold off on his announcement till the convention.
August 4th, 2008 at 7:54 pm
Why? If McCain waits, that gives him about 33% less time to camapign with the Veep.
August 4th, 2008 at 7:55 pm
“but not choosing Sebelius is the ultimate snub for Hillary supporters.”
Choosing another woman would have been a far bigger snub.
August 4th, 2008 at 7:57 pm
I STILL THINK IT’s TIM KAINE
August 4th, 2008 at 7:57 pm
It’s not the campaigning time with the Veep that will matter. It’s the boost it will give to the GOP convention and the press coverage generated from that. If he announces this week, it will be drowned out by the Obama campaign’s announcement. If he announces during the Olympics, that will drown it out. Also, if he announces during the Dem convention, that will drown it out. By early September, a lot people will be paying attention and his pick will grab the headlines when it counts. He should wait until the convention.
August 4th, 2008 at 8:02 pm
It would be a colossal mistake for Obama to pick Bayh on Wednesday, August 6 and get a free pass from the GOP until September 1. It would be colossally stupid.
1. The Olympics are not the only news.
2. The stock market will still be buffeted. Voters will be aware of the economic issues
3. Bayh will have 3 full weeks to introduce himself to the voters. One of those weeks , Obama will be on vacation, so the MSM will flock around Bayh.He will get lots of invaluable free press.
4. With Bayh dominating part of the domestic news for at least the week that Obama is on vacation, McCain will have to challenge the Dem VP instead of Obama, giving Bayh a lot of valuable visibility
5. McCain will foolishly give up 3 weeks of valuable time if he plans on picking a choice that is unknown to the voters;i.e., Cantor, Palin, Pawlenty, etc.
6. The two Dems can go in two different directions to two parts of the country at the same time and McCain can easily be whipsawed on issues and scheduling and will be totally eclipsed in the media.
In short, it would be dumb, dumb, dumb…to delay if McCain KNOWS the Dem pick!!!
August 4th, 2008 at 8:02 pm
If McCain waits, it will be a surprise pick. Probably a woman.
Bayh shows us Obama’s arrogance. Bayh is the safest pick he could make. Bayh makes no mistakes, but adds nothing to the ticket.
August 4th, 2008 at 8:05 pm
if your mccain camp and if you know this is obama vp would you be or should worried?
August 4th, 2008 at 8:05 pm
I also think McCain should wait until the convention. I don’t think campaigning with the veep candidate has much impact; it’s the announcement that does it. At this point, my preference would be for McCain to roll out Powell as VP at the convention. Failing that, Palin.
I completely agree with act-blog that picking a woman OTHER than Hillary would be the biggest snub. I think it would be very difficult for Obama to select a woman other than Clinton at this point.
August 4th, 2008 at 8:06 pm
Exactly, by making the media wait until the convention, the suspense built up is immense. Then, he can control the headlines for at least a week by announcing a game-changer such as the ones that have been discussed ad nauseam. The benefit of this, and being able to make his decision knowing who Obama chose will be worth much more than the few extra weeks of campaigning together/separately.
August 4th, 2008 at 8:09 pm
If your mccain is bayh a vp that your vp does not want to meet in vp debate?
August 4th, 2008 at 8:09 pm
“Bayh shows us Obama’s arrogance.”
This might be the one time that I stand up for Barry, but I don’t think a Bayh pick indicates arrogance; I think it belies it. Arrogance would be for him to select someone like Kaine and offer the country a ticket with gaspingly little experience to recommend it. Bayh is qualified to be president and has virtually every strategic advantage possible without the drawbacks. His pick is a de facto admission that Obama has little experience. So it’s a good pick, and one I hope he doesn’t actually make.
August 4th, 2008 at 8:10 pm
If your mccain is bayh a vp that your vp does not want to meet in vp debate?just wondering don’t know bayh that well what would our vp be up against in that vp debate?
August 4th, 2008 at 8:12 pm
Should we believe this rumor or could it still be someone else like tim kaine ect?
August 4th, 2008 at 8:12 pm
#18 - Bayh is a reasonably good if bland-ish speaker. He’s low key and affable in a Pawlenty kinda way. From what I’ve seen of him, he’s not unusually wily or quick on his feet, but no slouch, either. No special reason to fear him, I should think. He comes across, to me, as likeable but unmemorable. He’s not wooden, though, like Kaine is. Kaine is a terrible speaker (did you catch his State of the Union response? awful!). If McCain picked someone with much gravitas (like Powell) they should be able to walk all over him.
August 4th, 2008 at 8:13 pm
#18 - I doubt McCain will pick anyone so feckless as to be afraid of debating Bayh.
August 4th, 2008 at 8:13 pm
*By “him,” I meant Bayh, but that also applies to Kaine.
August 4th, 2008 at 8:14 pm
McCain likely to let Obama choose VP first
By waiting to make a major announcement in the window after Obama’s much-anticipated acceptance speech Aug. 28 at Invesco Field and before he receives his party’s nomination the following week, for example, McCain would be able to quickly shift the focus of the race following the Democratic convention.
Further, these advisers say, by waiting until the end of the month he could also gauge his pick based both on who Obama selects and what the contours of the race appear to be just two months out from Election Day.
“We’d be stupid to pick before they do,” said one top McCain adviser, speaking about the hush-hush decision on the basis of anonymity. “If they go first, you have more information.”
This source said McCain should take advantage of the “the luxury of having the option,” because of the Republicans’ later convention date.
And, said the adviser, the campaign ought to resist the temptation of making what would amount to a fleeting summer news splash.
“We don’t need a good couple of days — we need a good 60 days.”
August 4th, 2008 at 8:16 pm
#23 - Right. There are few politicians that anyone who is reasonably qualified, informed, and articulate should be “afraid” of debating. Cheney is one (Edwards = mincemeat). Huckabee I think could be another. I would love to see Huckabee in a one-on-one debate with someone (that’s NOT an endorsement for him for VP… God forbid).
August 4th, 2008 at 8:18 pm
Lets just say for fun How would a bayh rudy debate look like ?
August 4th, 2008 at 8:21 pm
#27 - Rudy would do fine, though I don’t share the opinion of many on here that Rudy’s a terrific debater. Aggression is not necessarily an advantageous trait in a debate. I’d point to Cheney’s avalanche of Edwards in the ‘04 VP debate… Cheney was very quiet, very deliberate, and very patient. Totally unflappable. I’ve seen Rudy go for some pretty stupid openings (attacking Fred over tort reform, for instance) that evidenced a pretty tin ear with regards to what would be effective in a given venue. And let’s not forget his disastrous “It’d be ok” response to the question about overturning Roe v. Wade. That was a debacle.
August 4th, 2008 at 8:24 pm
Shhesh, have some faith. A Giuiliani/Bayh debate would be like a Kentucky Derby final stretch with Seabiscuit running against My Friend Flicka.
August 4th, 2008 at 8:25 pm
Bayh is not a great debater. Obama is going with someone will not one will talk about in October.
August 4th, 2008 at 8:26 pm
interesting I was reading this and it says obama could wait to announce now vp in the closing days of olympics
August 4th, 2008 at 8:27 pm
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/08/05/veeps/index.html?source=rss
August 4th, 2008 at 8:28 pm
No .The Veep selection will remain a game of chicken until early September. Both campaigns will wait for the other to go first and thus use up their publicity capital gained with the Veep selection. Bayh may be his choice, but not this week.
http://www.political-buzz.com/
August 4th, 2008 at 8:29 pm
I must confess I didn’t think Cheney destroyed Edwards in the debate in 2004. I thought Edwards did well. However, Cheney did stop the rot after Bush was clearly trounced by Kerry in debate #1. Which goes to show how unimportant debates are in the final wash-up.
Bayh is a good, safe pick. And picking him now gives Obama the chance to have a break (which I think he needs) and still have a good go-to guy available in America.
Bayh doesn’t need time to get up to speed, and he provides centrist appeal & a good chance of assisting in some swing states (OH, MI & IN).
In short, McCain’ll be hoping he’s not picked.
I wonder if McCain will pick early, soon after Obama. It makes sense for him to go just after the Dem convention, but then there’s the risk that he doesn’t have anyone asisting him for 3 weeks.
August 4th, 2008 at 8:33 pm
#33, why do you plagiarize the work of reporters? Can you coem up with your own ideas?
August 4th, 2008 at 8:33 pm
#26
I ditto your wish for a Huck vs. Anyone debate!
August 4th, 2008 at 8:34 pm
WTF?!
“I’m so overexposed, I’m making Paris Hilton look like a recluse.”
Barack Obama, 2005
August 4th, 2008 at 8:35 pm
Boy am I glad we get we get cross examination questions in this years debates. Sorry, but I hope you’ll indulge my fantasy here…
MODERATOR: And now, we’ll shift to the final part of our debate, where the candidates are allowed to ask questions of eachother. The first question will be asked by Governor Palin.
SARAH PALIN: Senator Bayh, in the Democratic presidential primary, you endorsed Hillary Clinton over Barack Obama, even serving as a co-chair of her campaign. So my question to you is this: If you were offered that same choice again today, who would you endorse, Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama? And if you would still back Clinton, how can you stand on this stage tonight and tell us that you have full confidence in Senator Obama’s ablity to serve as president?
EVAN BAYH: Well…um..I…uh..
SARAH PALIN: That’s what I thouht.
August 4th, 2008 at 8:35 pm
#34 - I thought Edwards held his own, but Cheney allocated his most withering lines (”I’m the president of the Senate and I’d never met you before today”) for choice moments that ensured maximum damage. Edwards also didn’t maximize his zingers (like the one about Cheney voting to keep Mandela in prison, which he phrased unclearly) and ended up looking like a waifish amateur (which he was). It’s not that Edwards did a terrible job, it’s just that Cheney performed so effectively and stubbornly that it didn’t really matter what Edwards did. It was like trying to take down a brick wall with a knitting needle.
August 4th, 2008 at 8:35 pm
exactly i think mccain needs a running mate partner on the trail NOW!!
August 4th, 2008 at 8:37 pm
Bayh shows us Obama’s arrogance. Bayh is the safest pick he could make. Bayh makes no mistakes, but adds nothing to the ticket.
OK, that’s ridiculous. That’s not arrogance at all. Obama may be arrogant, but a Bayh pick does not indicate arrogance. What would be a ‘non-arrogant’ choice? Bayh’s a pretty humble choice, if you ask me.
August 4th, 2008 at 8:38 pm
What I was trying to communicate is that McCain must go early if Obama announces on Wednesday. Three extra weeks of 2 person Dem campaigning until the GOP convention is just too much exposure to give up …unless you are incredibly arrogant and truly believe that 3 weeks in an already short election cycle, is unimportant. And, though I prefer Romney, if McCain has someone else in mind as a VP choice, who is relatively less well known, why would he give a Bayh three free extra weeks over his own choice?
August 4th, 2008 at 8:39 pm
Bayh is a good pick. I live just across the state line from Indiana, and my Hoosier friends, even the Republicans, speak well of him.
Can he swing Indiana? Past results show that the VP candidate is worth, on average, about two points in his home state. Bayh is popular enough to possibly be worth a bit more. The polls have shown Indiana to be closer than usual this year, so it’s possible he could swing it — but I’d be inclined to bet it stays Republican.
August 4th, 2008 at 8:42 pm
#38 - I’ve always thought that picking a VP who endorsed someone else is asking for it. I mean, it creates the perfect opening for a question like the one you wrote above, or: “Senator Bayh, you initially endorsed Senator Clinton in the primaries. In what ways is Senator Obama lacking that caused you not to endorse him?” At that point, there’s really no answer that can ameloriate the damage done by the question. It makes the questionee look opportunistic. The pick would also beg the question: “Senator Obama, you repeatedly stated that you believed that you would be a better president than Senator Clinton. Doesn’t that, in your mind, display Senator Bayh’s questionable judgment? After all, isn’t judgment the virtue you’ve used to justify your candidacy?” It’s a relatively nuanced point to make, but could be made effectively by a more gifted scribe than I.
August 4th, 2008 at 8:42 pm
Palin, #38, you presumably haven’t seen Bayh handle questions before. The guy is a pro, and he certainly wouldn’t bottle a moment like that.
He would say something like:
“I strongly endorse Barack Obama for President. He showed during his campaign a willingness to confront the key issues facing this nation, and the people voted for him as our nominee. I fully support their choice”
Don’t fall into dreamland…
August 4th, 2008 at 8:42 pm
41,
Alex a point there. While Bayh is something of a safe pick, he’s also something of a desperate pick. Something tells me that Barack’s first choice (on a personal level) is someone who was a major force in the Clinton campaign. He would much prefer someone like Kaine, Sebelius, or Chet Edwards (who becomes more likely for every day that Barack dilly dallies, if Bayh is not announced on Wed, I would watch out for Chet)
August 4th, 2008 at 8:47 pm
#41 - I guess I just don’t see what’s desperate about picking the most advantageous candidate. It just smart politics. If McCain had a parallel option (and I *don’t* consider T-Paw to be one), I’d be shrieking for him to take it.
#45 - True - he’d be prepped to the gills for a question like that - but I don’t think there’s a response to that kind of a question that deflects all of the damage that the question does. It’s impossible to answer without a) coming across as opportunistic and flippy-floppy or b) damaging Obama. The other choice is to give a statement like the one you wrote, which isn’t an answer - and viewers would be smart to see it as such. It wouldn’t be a deathblow or anything, but wouldn’t do Obama/Bayh any good.
August 4th, 2008 at 8:47 pm
#42 - is Obama cancelling his August vacation? Would he want Bayh out campaigning alone for two weeks?
August 4th, 2008 at 8:48 pm
“He would say something like:
“I strongly endorse Barack Obama for President. He showed during his campaign a willingness to confront the key issues facing this nation, and the people voted for him as our nominee. I fully support their choice”’
You’re probably right there (which is why I called my post a fantasy, the part about Palin being in the debate is realistic), but that’s still an awfull answer, and the question will be used to dog Bayh throughout the entire campaign…and frankly there is no good answer.
August 4th, 2008 at 8:49 pm
Palin, #45, good grief, Obama can’t win.
-If he picks Hillary, it shows weakness
- If he picks another woman, he’s snubbing Hillary (i.e. stupid)
- if he picks a supporter of his (e.g. Kaine) it shows arrogance
- if he picks a qualified former Hillary supporter, it shows desparation.
So, who can he pick without getting a backlash from you. Anybody?
August 4th, 2008 at 8:51 pm
#50, Dick Gephardt.
August 4th, 2008 at 8:52 pm
44,
You are entirely right. Picking a VP to pander to Hillary’s people is an especially bad move for Obama, who has based his entire campaign on a “new kind of politics”. 19th-century-stle horse-trading with the VP nomination is nothing new. Personally, I think Obama does himself much more good by picking a relatively conservative Dem who still back him over Hillary…Chet Edwards.
August 4th, 2008 at 8:56 pm
#50 - Yeah, I agree. I think we should be careful not to run away with the “Obama is arrogant” meme. I think that IS a true statement, but not everything he does is indicative of arrogance. If we play that card over and over, it makes us look braying and petty. Obama-fied presidential seal? Arrogant. VP picks? Not arrogant. I would refine my statement in #19… I don’t think a Kaine pick would be arrogant, per se… just overconfident.
August 4th, 2008 at 8:57 pm
Should mccain just bite the bullet and announce tomorrow before Wednesday but at this point mccain is trapped in this vp choice day timing thing seems like obama is calling the game plays for this whole vp announcement.
August 4th, 2008 at 8:58 pm
#52 - I don’t know much about Chet Edwards, but from what I do, he would be a good pick. Except at this point, I think picking a VP with the last name Edwards would cause no small amount of confusion amongst the electorate.
August 4th, 2008 at 9:01 pm
Chet Edwards is stongly endorsed by…Nancy Pelosi ?/ Good pick ?
August 4th, 2008 at 9:06 pm
#52, check your email.
#54, McCain should do it when he is ready, but definately after Obama.
August 4th, 2008 at 9:10 pm
Bayh is a bad choice for Obama.
Get this, he not only voted for the war, he was the co-sponsor of the Iraq War resolution. Not only that but among before the war started, a group called the committee for the liberation of Iraq bestowed 3 awards upon Senators who were leading the fight to remove Saddam. They were John McCain, Joe Lieberman, and…wait for it…Evan Bayh.
Picking Bayh totally removes Obama’s whole anti-war theme and his superior judgment. It plays his leftist base for idiots and fools. First FISA, then drilling, then he picks a pro war VP who sponsored the resolution????
Bayh gave a speech at AIPAC praising Lieberman and saying how he’s the politician he most resembles.
He voted twice to ban partial birth abortion
He voted for the Lieberman-Kyl Iran resolution that Obama attacked Clinton for and that the left despised.
In 2003 only 3 dems voted for the Bush tax cuts. They were Zell Miller, Ben Nelson, and wait for it…Evan Bayh.
The list goes on.
No way he picks Bayh
August 4th, 2008 at 9:13 pm
#56 - I don’t think Pelosi irrevocably taints him as a pick. He has a degree in economics and an MBA, which won’t exactly hurt in this cycle. His district also includes President Bush’s Crawford ranch, which has enormous symbolic strength. He’s older enough than Obama to lend some gravitas, and has a long political career. He has a pretty conservative district that he wins nonetheless, even against an Iraq veteran in 2006. That’s a terrific resume for this cycle. If I were Obama I would personally still go with Bayh, but Pelosi sanction or not, I’d be happy to have Edwards (Chet only).
August 4th, 2008 at 9:16 pm
58 - And what are the leftists gonna do? Vote for McCain? Please.
Obama knows that the leftists want a Democrat as president and they don’t care who it is. Bayh is a great choice electorally.
Obama’s already shown that he doesn’t care what the leftists think, anyway — why do you think he keeps flip-flopping? He wants to win. Bayh is his top choice, if you ask me, barring a retired general.
August 4th, 2008 at 9:19 pm
#58 - That’s great research and I grant you all of those things, but I think they don’t necessarily hurt Obama. The leftist base is going to vote for him regardless. Bayh’s willingness to vote with Republicans on tax cuts plays with Obama’s theme of bipartisanship (despite facts to the contrary). Plus, tax cuts are always popular, and that would enable Bayh to trot out a line like, “I voted to cut your taxes even when John McCain didn’t.” Granted, Obama was against those tax cuts so that might be tricky, but it could be done. Crossing party lines to vote for tax cuts is ALWAYS a good thing, electorally speaking. We could attack Bayh for co-sponsoring the Iraq resolution and saying he resembled Lieberman, but then we would be attacking him for thinking like… our candidate? Who would attack Bayh for these stances? Not us. Certainly not liberal 527s. He’s a great pick.
August 4th, 2008 at 9:27 pm
#60 Alex Knepper,
Exactly why I think Wesley Clark is still in the running if this Wednesday announcement turns out to be false speculation.
August 4th, 2008 at 9:31 pm
#58, you are probably correct, but….
Some leftists and former Republicans actually like McCain, but are not inclined to support him, primarily due to his Iraq war policy. If they see no difference between the two candidates, then McCain becomes more accaptable.
Again, your theory is the probable one, but you never do know.
August 4th, 2008 at 9:31 pm
62 - Clark would have been the frontrunner, if you ask me, until he shot himself in the foot with that insult to McCain’s military service. (Not really an insult, if you ask me, but the electorate ain’t gonna like it.) I still think he’s in contention, though, and a top five most likely pick. Don’t rule out Zinni and Jones, either.
August 4th, 2008 at 9:34 pm
What is the procedure for replacing a Senator who steps down in IN? I know IN has a GOP Governor so could we pick up a Senate seat with Gov Daniels appointed a Repub to finish of Bayh’s term?
August 4th, 2008 at 9:36 pm
Assuming Bayh retires.
August 4th, 2008 at 9:36 pm
$64, Jones????
“Gen. James L. Jones, a retired former commandant of the Marines and supreme commander of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, has been mentioned as an out-of-the-box choice for Senator Barack Obama. But there General Jones was on Wednesday, sharing a stage in Springfield, Mo., with Mr. Obama’s Republican competitor for president, Senator John McCain.” - NYT
August 4th, 2008 at 9:38 pm
67 - I don’t think he’d turn it down if Obama offered it. Would be a good chance to show his “bipartisan” nature, too.
August 4th, 2008 at 9:40 pm
#68, Jones works for President Bush, as the Special Envoy for Middle East.
August 4th, 2008 at 9:44 pm
test
August 4th, 2008 at 9:49 pm
just like they had no where to go in 2000 with Gore. Of course they’ll vote for Gore, what else are they gonna do?
just like 1992, right? Yeha, is the base really gonna vote for Clinton? Or Perot which is effectively a vote for Clinotn?
just imagine what the reaction would be if McCain picks a VP who’s for partial birth abortions? he’d be finished.
The PUMAs and Hillary supporters already don’t like Obama, and now he goes with an anti-choice VP who voted for the Iraq War and championed it in the Senate, the very same thing Obama spent over a year attacking Hillary for non stop? Not to mention his other apostasies.
I think Bayh hurts Obama nationally, helps him maybe marginally in IN at best. I doubt he’ll be the pick. Too many issues.
As for McCain, I’m liking Meg Whitman more and more.
A woman and business/econ creds. instantly strengthens McCain on his weakest area. transformational, maverick, out of left field. i think the press will love it. she’ll do great with soccer oms/security moms, older white women, suburban white women.
McCain/Whitman.
August 4th, 2008 at 9:59 pm
This ain’t 2000, jim. This is post-Bush, their most reviled president of all time. 2000 was still “end of history” mode where a protest vote was okay.
2000 taught them their lesson.
1992 — Perot’s votes pretty much went 50/50. He didn’t necessarily drain from Bush.
The McCain base wouldn’t allow a candidate that supports partial-birth abortion because the McCain base is ultimately unenthusiastic, bored, and just voting against the other guy. The leftists aren’t vital (more will be brought in by Bayh than leftists repelled to Nader) and mostly don’t care about anything except kicking the Republicans out, at this point.
I’d be satisfied with McCain-Whitman, but I don’t think she’ll be it. But then again, you never know. But if he picks her, it would need to be soon, because she’s a virtual unknown. Same with the other female options — Fiorina (whom I like, but would be a bad choice) and Palin.
August 4th, 2008 at 10:02 pm
Evan Bayh’s softball team The Partisans have cancelled their game for Wed. Hmmmm.
August 4th, 2008 at 10:04 pm
#72 - Of the female possibilities, I think Palin is the best. I also like Fiorina a lot, but there would be too many HP questions (and rightly so). There’s too high a probability that that pick would implode. And I think Whitman - unfairly - would have image issues. She’s not very telegenic - unlike Palin.
August 4th, 2008 at 10:05 pm
I suggest you vastly underestimate the importance of “choice” among dem voters.
I wonder how NARAL feels? They went all out to back a guy who might name as his #s and successor if something happens a guy who twice voted to ban partial birth abortion, a law they fought all the way to the SC and are still fighting in state and federal courts. An issue that has been near and dear to them for over a decade and Obama might toss them aside like that.
we’ll see. I don’t think it will be Bayh, for the abortion reason, but also for a number of others.
The war stuff, the DLC connections, the tax cuts, FISA, the Patriot Act, plenty of other votes will be more than enough for them to look in another direction.
August 4th, 2008 at 10:05 pm
Candidate’s who select their VP’s early, are often worried.
I am starting to believe that a McCain convention pick is the correct choice. Everyone keeps bringing up Quayle, but the problem with Quayle was not the timing, it was the prep. work. Quayle was not prepped and the entire GOP was not prepped. If McCain can boost ratings after an Obama convention speech, then pick after the Obama speech.
I disagree with #72, the longer this goes on, the better chance for an unknown. McCain is clearly doing some serious deliberation on this. I believe McCain is going for glory on this.
August 4th, 2008 at 10:07 pm
everyone, if McCain is going to pick this week, then look at who has been quiet this past week. Who have we not seen or heard from?
August 4th, 2008 at 10:07 pm
#75:
Ironically enough Jim, my Hoosier relatives say that Sen. Bayh has moved too far to the left recently. They think that when he was positioning to run for President he became too liberal.
August 4th, 2008 at 10:11 pm
Bob, it has to be Romney. He’s on holiday, and he will deliver the West, North East, Mid West, and Canada to McCain.
Seriously though, I don’t think McCain will pick this week. Unlike Obama, who doesn’t have any time between the olympics and the convention, McCain has 4 days between the Dem convention and his own. So that’s the logical time to pick.
August 4th, 2008 at 10:13 pm
#72 - Of the female possibilities, I think Palin is the best. I also like Fiorina a lot, but there would be too many HP questions (and rightly so). There’s too high a probability that that pick would implode. And I think Whitman - unfairly - would have image issues. She’s not very telegenic - unlike Palin.
Fiorina could implode. High-risk, high-reward — she’s a strong, competent, articulate woman. She’d potentially be utterly fantastic at capturing the Hillary vote. She’s got an amazing story to tell. I’m reading her memoir, Tough Choices, right now. I love the woman. But the fact that she was fired by HP’s board and got a “golden parachute” out will create some problems. She’s also defended outsourcing. Lovely, in my opinion, but bad electoral politics.
August 4th, 2008 at 10:16 pm
Romney was just on TV today, ripping Obama.
Meg Whitman may not be a MILF like Palin, but she’s not a hag, either. She’s homely, but I think that connects better with older women anyway.
Look at her background, EBay, Hasbro, FTD flowers, P and G in Ohio, Disney, Dreamworks, etc… That’s all golden.
I saw her on Charlie Rose and else where and she can talk about the economy and business with anyone. Has just as good command as Romney, none of his negatives. doesn’t have the corporate raider gordon gekko image. She’d be a huge hit among the business class, investors, would be the best advocate on the economy for either campaign.
I think she’d be a grand slam with suburban women, and could win the election with that bloc alone.
August 4th, 2008 at 10:16 pm
“After criticizing Obama’s energy policy, McCain added:” “”We’re not going to achieve energy independence by inflating our tires.”"
I have a feeling that this comment by Obama is going to haunt him.
August 4th, 2008 at 10:18 pm
Whitman is just as good as Fiorina at appealing to women and the Hillary/PUMA crowd
She doesnt have the HP baggage
she has kids and a more appealing family story
what are the real negatives with Whitman?
August 4th, 2008 at 10:20 pm
bob, #82, its a shame for Obama in a way too. Cos his comment about inflating tires helping is very true (as per TIME magazine).
August 4th, 2008 at 10:21 pm
#81, “She’s homely, but I think that connects better with older women anyway.”
OMG! Don’t let your mother know you said that!
BTW, it is not MILF, it is GOVILF.
August 4th, 2008 at 10:25 pm
Fiorina’s business background can be used against her. Offshoring is not terrily electorally popular. A bit like Romney’s private equity weakness.
Whitman is less proven on the national stage than Fiorina, who has been a bit of an attack dog for McCain in recent times.
August 4th, 2008 at 10:25 pm
#84, Time is wrong.
1) Not realistic, unless we want to start to have our police pull people over to check tires.
2) Does not solve energy issue, especially the growth in demand. By the time we finished the $500 million marketing campaign, we would have achieved some success, but further demands in energy would have resulted in the investment to be a net negative.
Why not just drill?
August 4th, 2008 at 10:32 pm
Bob, addressing those points:
1) why on earth do we need police to check tires? Surely people can inflate their own tires & keep them at a good pressure (its in their own interests, for goodness sake). Its merely a matter of publicising it, which McCain isn’t really helping with. I’d much rather McCain had said “that is one thing we should do, but we should also drill” - but that wouldn’t be as good politically. Its a shame where politics defeats common sense, shows how stupid the electorate are I suppose).
2) Isn’t it funny that we reject all these small partial-solutations (e.g. energy saving light bulbs, smaller cars, tire pressure) cos we want one big easy fix. Its lazy. Its stupid to reject something that helps on the grounds that we are only prepared to do one thing. Daft in fact.
August 4th, 2008 at 10:45 pm
Jonathan,
Your Hoosier relatives are correct. There would be ample opportunity to bust the meme that Bayh represents a moderate voice to balance Obama’s otherwise left wing agenda.
Bayh’s ACU rating in 2007 was 12. In 2006, it was 16. And, his lifetime rating is 19.78.
National Journal ranked him the 38th most liberal senator last year; more liberal than Tester, Carper, Webb, Salazar, Dorgan, McCaskill, Baucus, Conrad, Pryor, Landrieu and Ben Nelson and every Republican.
Bayh voted against confirming both Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito, where he was among the 25 partisan Democrats, Obama included, who supported the judicial filibuster, that ultimately was beaten back by the bipartisan Gang of 14.
In 2007 NARAL Pro-Choice America gave Senator Bayh a grade of 100.
In 2007 National Taxpayers Union gave Senator Bayh a grade of D.
Senator Bayh supported the interests of the Americans for Tax Reform 15 percent in 2006.
Senator Bayh supported the interests of the Concerned Women for America 11 percent in 2005-2006.
In 2007 Family Research Council gave Senator Bayh a grade of 14.
In 2007 Gun Owners of America gave Senator Bayh a rating of F.
Senator Bayh supported the interests of the Gun Owners of America 100 percent in 2006.
Senator Bayh supported the interests of the English First 0 percent in 2007.
In 2007 U.S. English gave Senator Bayh a grade of F.
Senator Bayh supported the interests of the American Immigration Lawyers Association 88 percent in 2006.
Senator Bayh supported the interests of the AFL-CIO 100 percent in 2007.
In 2007 American Society of Landscape Architects gave Senator Bayh a rating of 100.
Senator Bayh supported the interests of the Bakery, Confectionary, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers Int 100 percent in 2007.
In 2007 International Brotherhood of Boilermakers gave Senator Bayh a grade of 100.
Senator Bayh supported the interests of the Service Employees International Union 83 percent in 2007.
Senator Bayh supported the interests of the United Auto Workers 100 percent in 2007.
In 2007 Utility Workers Union of America gave Senator Bayh a grade of 100.
Senator Bayh supported the interests of the Americans for Democratic Action 95 percent in 2007.
In 2005-2006 USA Engage gave Senator Bayh a grade of D.
August 4th, 2008 at 10:47 pm
#83: “what are the real negatives with Whitman?”
I don’t know of any, although there’s certainly a risk in putting someone who has never run for office before on a national ticket. She could be a total dud as a campaigner/debater.
Nonetheless, I like the idea of nominating Whitman.
August 4th, 2008 at 10:51 pm
JayPe wrote: “I’d much rather McCain had said “that is one thing we should do, but we should also drill” - but that wouldn’t be as good politically.”
Actually, McCain did say just that.
August 4th, 2008 at 10:52 pm
#88, car pooling, investments in transit and tax breaks from home reno’s to make your home more energy efficient is more realistic. Our Government cannot even get teenagers to wear condoms, so how could we expect to make a difference by educating people to put air in their tires?
It was a stupid thing to say, and Obama knows it. The POTUS is a serious position.
August 4th, 2008 at 10:52 pm
JayPe wrote: “I’d much rather McCain had said “that is one thing we should do, but we should also drill” - but that wouldn’t be as good politically.”
Actually, McCain did say just that.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJdV599×6Gg&eurl=http://thinkprogress.org/2008/08/04/mccain-obama-tires/
August 4th, 2008 at 10:55 pm
I share the same excitement many of you express at the idea of a Whitman or Fiorina VEEP selection…. BUT just imagine the ads groups like MoveOn.Org would put out. It gives them too much ammo to paint the GOP as in the pockets of corporate America.
August 4th, 2008 at 10:57 pm
Good, so he should. If only all his subordinates did so too. The worry is this need to humiliate the other guy, rather than co-opting his good policies and highlighting his bad ones.
I see the oil problem as being a bit like economics. Growing the economy requires a supply-side approach, because demand is essentially limited. Oil use is a demand-side issue. We can grow supply (e.g. drill in new places) but at the end of the day, the supply is limited. So it makes sense to target demand and reduce it.
A strategy should cover both, but it seems that McCain is in danger of being the supplys-dier to Obama’s demand-sider. Not a winner, for either.
August 4th, 2008 at 11:00 pm
#83, #90,
See my #93.
August 4th, 2008 at 11:01 pm
#93, don’t buy in to the anti-corporate jargon. McCain is running as a free-trader in Ohio and he is ahead by 10 (Rasmussen) in Ohio.
August 4th, 2008 at 11:05 pm
#96,
I myself don’t buy into it at all. However, in this tough economic environment, it’s easy to see McCain suffering in Minnesota, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and other places hit hardest by the slow-down when in the back of their mind they know that Exxon-Mobil just posted an all-time quarterly profit record. Is there any actual relation to Exxon’s profit and Meg Whitman’s ability to serve as vice-president? OF COURSE NOT! But MoveOn.Org can make the case (of lies) and there WILL be some impact.
August 4th, 2008 at 11:08 pm
McCain is running as a free trader, but he’s always backing “Main Street” over “wall Street”, so he’s not ardently pro-corporate.
August 4th, 2008 at 11:13 pm
perhaps, but how many MORE women will just see Obama and his male minions going after another successful woman and trying to bring her down? The PUMAs will only grow angrier.
once Whitman talks about Disney, ftd flowers, hasbro toys, suburban moms will be eating out of her hand. Obama will be flailing.
the footage of seen of her is very impressive. have her concentrate on outreach to women in key battleground states, some high profile meetings with business leaders throughout te country, high profile tv appearances on The View, Ellen, Oprah, and other female oriented shows, talking up the economy while McCain focuses on nat’l security and energy.
she’s on the board at dreamworks. have you checked the box office returns for Shrek lately?
besides moveon? McCain could come out and say “I’m honored that Meg is now in the same company with Gen Petraeus as great americans who have been smeared by Barack Obama and his liberal allies. She considers it a badge of honor” game set match
August 4th, 2008 at 11:18 pm
“she’s on the board at dreamworks. have you checked the box office returns for Shrek lately? ”
Um, I don’t disagree with the rest of your post, but on this logic McCain should pick the ExxonMobil CEO.
August 4th, 2008 at 11:19 pm
JayPe,
I have previously suggested that McCain could own this issue by comprehensively calling for exploration in the stamp-sized northernmost spot of ANWR, while agreeing to a 25 or 50-year moratorium that would prohibit any further drilling in the remaining 99.9% of the frozen wildlife refuge, and would ban any exploration in U.S. national parks; while simultaneously offering tax breaks to companies that allow and encourage their employees to work from home via webcam, or videoconference. This would greatly reduce demand for oil, thus reducing the cost to all Americans, and as an added benefit, reduce traffic, CO2 emissions, accidents, the cost of auto insurance and all the accompanying stress. Worker productivity would increase, couples could have more quality time together, and parents would get to spend more time with their children.
August 4th, 2008 at 11:23 pm
Aron, that sounds marvellous. But unfortunately it is rather complicated for the likes of Paris Hilton & Britney Spears to understand. And it seems that is the level that this campaign is descending too.
How good would it be though, if more employees worked from home?
August 4th, 2008 at 11:24 pm
You guys are making a convincing case for Whitman. While she offers no real geographic bonuses, she does shake up the race nationally with the gender and economic issues.
As for Fiorina, her $21 million send-off from HP is sure to raise some eyebrows….
While on the subject of female VEEPs, I would like to hear the case against Kay Bailey Hutchison. I think she should still be considered.
August 4th, 2008 at 11:28 pm
Hutchison is:
- from Texas (Bush!)
- a Senator (Washington!)
So brings no executive experience, no marginal state, and no message of ‘change’. The only thing she has going for her is that she’s female.
August 4th, 2008 at 11:32 pm
I can understand your points. She’s been flirting with the idea of a run for governor in 2010 for some time now. 2012 could be a break-out year for her.
August 4th, 2008 at 11:37 pm
81. Oh.My.God. We’re really not all that far removed from the cave, now are we jim?
August 4th, 2008 at 11:40 pm
Great stuff on Meg Whitman, jim.
I suspect the record will show I was the first on this site to bring her up being a serious candidate for McCain’s Veep pick.
The risk is, with political inexperience, what are the odds she has a major gaffe or two?
August 4th, 2008 at 11:41 pm
JayPe, Paris Hilton & Britney Spears probably would understand, but not Barry.
August 4th, 2008 at 11:42 pm
For Obama the best choice is Bill Richardson.
Why?
It’s called playing the race card without your opponent realizing it is played. If Obama double downs on the race issue without even having to talk about it, then he wins. By selecting Richardson, you put the race issue on steriods and ANY criticism of the Democrat ticket becomes a racial issue WITHOUT Obama saying a word. The media will do it for him. It would be the perfect political Judo.
August 4th, 2008 at 11:43 pm
Plus Bill brings you foreign experience and the energy issue WITHOUT overshadowing Obama. And he gets you a few swing states with Hispanics, i.e. Florida, Nevada, Colorado, and New Mexico.
August 4th, 2008 at 11:46 pm
#109,
Not to mention, if Democrats had been smart in the first place, Richardson would be choosing BARACK as HIS veep right now. Heck, even I like Richardson a lot on economic issues.
August 4th, 2008 at 11:46 pm
2012 could be a break-out year? In what way?
If she’s going to run for President, she needs 6 years of Governor under her belt, and a resucitated Bush legacy. If Bush is still in the doldrums, the country will not vote for a Texas governor.
August 4th, 2008 at 11:47 pm
Richardson will really help with the PUMAs and Clinton voters. Maybe Obama can name Ken Starr as his AG at the same time. Billy Dale to head the travel office. Ann Coulter as Press Secretary.
Richardson has some womanizing issues also that came up in 2004 when he was vetted for Kerry’s VP. He’s out.
what was so bad about 81?
I doubt Whitman would make any huge gaffes. You don’t have her success in the corporate world and make huge gaffes.
August 4th, 2008 at 11:49 pm
Mark it down. It will be Bill Richardson for Obama.
August 4th, 2008 at 11:49 pm
Kristofer, #108, can we make one thing clear. Barrack (that’s his name) is a very smart individual. One is most welcome to criticise his liberalism, his lack of experience, but his intelligence is well documented.
To fight against that is petty at best, blindly stupid at worst.
August 4th, 2008 at 11:52 pm
Texas, #111, I quite agree. Bill Richardson would have been a very smart choice. But the Dem voters didn’t want experience, and Bill (along with Dodd & Biden) had too much!
Having said that, I agree with jim, #113. His reputation with women is not the best, and would cost him votes. Obama needs women. Bayh & Kaine do no harm on that front, Hillary helps, Sebelius is complicated (good for women, bad for hillary). Richardson is a bad pick for them.
He was a good VP for Hillary, but not for Obama. Two minorities on one ticket is pushing things. He’ll be around come 2012 …
August 4th, 2008 at 11:57 pm
JayPe, I am not allowed to use his FULL name, or I will be called an Islamophobe. You would probably be the first apologist to call me on it.
Upon thinking of it, we have never seen Barry’s birth certificate, so how do we know what his real name is?
Barry has zero political smarts. ZERO! Only someone as inexperienced as Obama would give us a Dan Quayle quote; such as putting air in tires to stop the energy crisis and reduce our demand in foreign oil.
Why do you think they hide Barry from the media?
August 4th, 2008 at 11:59 pm
JayPE, “but his intelligence is well documented”
Really? How, what legislation has Barry introduced that has changed the lives of American’s? His IQ is 125 at best.
August 5th, 2008 at 12:05 am
> “Barrack (that’s his name)”
JayPe: When you’re being condescending, it’s probably best not to misspell the name. One “r”.
August 5th, 2008 at 12:05 am
Ok, Kristofer, lets bullet point this:
- Barrack Obama prefers to be called “Barrack Obama”. Just like Mitt Romney prefers to be called “Mitt Romney” (no Willard please) and Rudy prefers “Rudy” to Rudolph. Its a basic courtesy to call people what they want to be called.
- he has “zero political smarts”? Bearing in mind that he is currently the Democratic nominee for President, having slayed the almighty Hillary Clinton juggernaut, I think we can put that to one side. He is politically smart.
- his intelligence is not measured in terms of “legislation that has changed the lives of Americans”. Please! Thats not a normal measure of intelligence. Have you introduced any legislation? Does that make you stupid? I think not. However, given Obama did so well at Harvard, and given where he is now, it is fair to give him a little credit at least. Which unfortunately you seem unable to do…
August 5th, 2008 at 12:06 am
#119, that’s hilarious! You’re quite right, it is only one r. My apoligies.
August 5th, 2008 at 12:16 am
81 and 113.
“Meg Whitman may not be a MILF like Palin, but she’s not a hag, either. She’s homely, but I think that connects better with older women anyway.”
I’m flabbergasted at this statement. I’m one of those older women and I could give a rat’s ass that Sarah is a beautiful woman. Her beauty doesn’t threaten me or make me the least bit uncomfortable.
August 5th, 2008 at 12:16 am
Ok JayPe, let us bullet point.
- His only success at HLS was based on the fact that he was a compromise candidate (accident), probably an affirmative action candidate.
- Yes, I (most others) judge people’s “smarts” by their workplace/career success. Barry has nothing. Could you actually name us one major legislative success of Barry’s?
- Senator Obama is a public figure. I may call him whatever I prefer to call him. I call Senator McCain, “Johny Mac”, “McCain”, “John McCain”, “JM”.
I have never met Barry, so I am unaware of what his family and friends call him. I know when he was a young man living in Indonesia his friends called him Barry, and maybe they still do now?
JayPe, Senator Obama (okay?) and yourself are creating this backlash against this political sensitivity/correctness. “Ooooh, you can’t say that!” People are getting tired of it……in fact, I am waiting for you to pull the same card as Senator Obama did the other day…it is your last chance…..?
August 5th, 2008 at 12:19 am
101: Yes, that would make a lot of sense. We cant “drill” our way out, nor can we “conserve” our way out either. We have to do both, plus DRASTICALLY re-work our lease agreements. Instead of the government offering up leases and royalties at UNADJUSTED prices, require payment “in-kind production sharing” If the field produces 500K/day, then the government’s share is a set fraction of that, let say 20% (substitute your own percentage). The government collects the resale price of those 100K barrels. (If oil trades at $100 and the share is 100K, then the in kind fee is $10M a day.–Again, sub in your own percentages). THat way if oil goes and production goes up, so do revenues. If oil/production goes down, then so do revenues. Before you think of it as a kooky idea, the Government of Alaska is looking to exactly that same model for its gas pipeline project to the lower 48. The government can then use those funds to rebuild other aspects of our energy infrastructure.
105: Whitman is a longshot at best and given CA’s political setup, very difficult to win. She’s gotta survive the republican primaries and then run in the general, potentially against diane Feinstein. Feinstein pretty much has a direct shot, if she’s still interested in the job (lost to pete wilson in 1990). Dems generally have statewide CA elections sewn up unless the dem candidate is hopelessly flawed or the repub candidate liberal like Schwartzenegger.
August 5th, 2008 at 12:38 am
NAME
Kristofer, thank you for continuing to call me “JayPe”. I shall continue to call you “Kristofer”. Its hilarious that we’re arguing over names, but suuch is life. I personally prefer to call people what they prefer. It is a sad tactic when people use names to ridicule people. “slick Willard” used to annoy me (and the Rombots) while Rudy fans got fed up with the occasional “Rudolph” jibe. If you’re not doing it to annoy his supporters, then I’ll let it past.
SMARTS
Interesting perspective, but I’ll subtly adjust it if I may. A politician is measured by success. In particular, their success at getting people to vote for them. If that is the true measure (and given people can view politicians legislative records it seems fair to me) then he is successful in his short career so far. Yes, he has been lucky, but you sometimes create your own luck. McCain was undoubtedly lucky in the 2008 primary, but I wouldn’t hold it against him.
HLS SUCCESS
You say he was a compromise candidate. I’ve never heard that before, but would be interested to know where you get that from. I can’t find a mention of that. Plus his grades seem to have been very good from what I can find (Wikipedia, cough!)
August 5th, 2008 at 12:41 am
Texas, #105, were you talking about Hutchison or Meg Whitman?
I (#112) interpreted it as Hutchison, PeaJay (#124) interpreted it as Whitman.
August 5th, 2008 at 12:55 am
HLS
#125, Barry was the accidental candidate, and some claim his election was not based on merit. ”was a choice on the merit.http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0CE2DC1631F935A35751C0A966958260
August 5th, 2008 at 1:04 am
Interesting article. Amazing how even though he’s an “unknown”, he’s been known for a while.
The article doesn’t say he was an accidental candidate, though. It says that the choice is based on a combination of grades & writing competition. That’s to be editor, which I believe he made at the end of his first year, before becoming President the next year.
So I think it remains that achieving the post was no mean feat.
August 5th, 2008 at 2:12 am
# 128. To the extent that Gore passed on running (he’d almost certainly won the Dem Primary) and Hillary ran a disfunctional campaign (that practically expected a coronation in Dnever and failed to adjust when that didnt happen), Obama’s rise was certainly not expected. His ability to run a nearly-perfectly executed campaign allowed him to succeed. I think the expectation was that he would run a good clean campaign and wind up as the VP pick.
McCain should be considered an “accidental” nominee. His campaign was practically dead last summer. Only due to the fortuitous set of circumstances starting with Thompsons lethargic campaign (the forgone front runner remember?), Romney’s early poor gamble on IA, Guiliani’s “blow it on FL” strategy and Huckabee’s bad luck of being deprived of a SC victory by THompsons sleepy showing and losing MO by a tiny percentage and gaining no delegates.
August 5th, 2008 at 1:23 pm
It’s too bad Kristol has been hitting the Palin/Jindal Kool-Aid. What about these two signals “change” from the recent period of GOP dominance. They’re only popular among Republican activists because they stick so closely to the social conservative agenda that so many of these activists hold dear. Their “reform” records are pretty short so far, and the successes of those reforms have yet to be evaluated. On the other hand, the things that most closely link them are positions like opposition to abortion rights in all situations, which are extremely unpopular with the electorate. People will see right through any attempt by the GOP to simply update the costumes for the same bomb of an act they’ve been selling for years.
August 5th, 2008 at 3:54 pm
Nowandlater: So does the goatee Richardson grew to look more ethnic stay on or does he shave it off if he is selected?
IF IT IS RICHARDSON, OBAMA LOSES THE WHITE VOTE OF THE ENTIRE COUNTRY.
YOU DINGBATS!!!!!!
August 5th, 2008 at 5:58 pm
#132,
What? Are you saying that America is racist?
August 5th, 2008 at 8:12 pm
#133 is the perfect example of the line of attack they will use AND it will work!!!! The Obama campaign wouldn’t have to raise it because the media will do all the heavy lifting for them.