VP sweepstakes - Both sides 8 replies

Please wait...

Phoenix_22 VIP Member

46 and 2, are just ahead of me

255,785 XP

23rd September 2004

0 Uploads

24,266 Posts

0 Threads

#1 10 years ago

With the democratic nomination more or less wrapped up (thankfully), I'd like to hear what you all think about running mates for both the republican and democratic nominees, John McCain and Barack Obama.

Let's start with McCain:

The current concerns over McCain are his policies on neo-conservative issues: gay marriage, illegal immigration, abortion, and other family values. He seems to have prided himself as a foreign policy presidential candidate, but he will need either someone experienced in economics or someone who appeals to the neo-conservative base.

I am currently thinking that his VP would be either Mike Huckabee, Charlie Crist, or Joe Liebermann.

Huckabee is the southern governor who appeals to the neo-conservative base, not to mention the southern states that will be hotly contested between McCain and Obama, Huckabee might be able to swing them in favor of McCain, despite the "Bible Belt"'s "red" history.

Charlie Crist is the current governor of Florida. He is a Republican, but is more liberal on certain issues, like McCain. I've heard he might be able to bring in Southern states as well, but I have to wonder what Crist's appeal is outside of Florida. He won by a considerable margin and many democrats did not have a problem with Crist, including myself. He's another "moderate."

Liebermann has been brought up a few times, but I wonder if McCain would risk pulling in a liberal independant that has been on the ticket before (Al Gore).

For Barack Obama:

Obama needs some help in a few areas to really round out the campaign, white voters, older voters, hispanic voters, and those voters who want to see a full resume for a candidate. Obama has energized liberal voters and has floated the prospect of a cross-party administration, so liberals and conservatives are at play. He has a good track record on social issues and has a different foreign policy view to McCain, but skeptics might want to see a balance with an older, experienced policy maker or military man (or woman).

I would see him nominating one of the following:

Bill Richardson. My initial presidential candidate, Richardson has a long list of foreign policy experience and could help with the Hispanic vote. I'm hoping for this team-up.

Joe Biden. A Washington figure, Biden has a long history on Capitol Hill and could bring loads of experience to the campaign, he also has that "old person" appeal (=p).

Bloomberg. Has experience in dealing with homeland security, and oh yeah, he's a billionaire businessman. As much of an "elitist" as he may be, the economy will be the topic this election and Bloomberg would be a perfect fit. There is also the appeal to more Republicans if Bloomberg is the VP.

Anyway, what do you all think will be the most important issues when November comes around? Who would be the best candidate for vice president for each nominee?




masked_marsoe VIP Member

Heaven's gonna burn your eyes

50 XP

16th April 2005

0 Uploads

8,063 Posts

0 Threads

#2 10 years ago
I am currently thinking that his VP would be either Mike Huckabee, Charlie Crist, or Joe Liebermann.

Bobby Jindal is another favourite, for the following reasons:

  • He's 36 (compared to Obama's 44, or McCain's 71)
  • Governor of Louisiana (won with an impressive majority, post-Katrina)
  • First generation Indian-American (dots, not feathers =p)
  • Impeccable conservative record
  • Cleaned up corruption, brought in strict ethics laws
  • Classic American Dream character (rags to riches stuff)
  • Impressive experience: "During his tenure as secretary (in his mid-20s), Louisiana's Medicaid program went from bankruptcy with a $400 million deficit into three years of surpluses totaling $220 million."

Only one problem, he doesn't seem too keen on the idea.

As for Obama, Richardson would be a good pick, but there's always the race issue of a black man and a Latino...




GuineaPig

All my base are belong to n0e

50 XP

14th February 2004

0 Uploads

505 Posts

0 Threads

#3 10 years ago
masked_marsoe;4369233 As for Obama, Richardson would be a good pick, but there's always the race issue of a black man and a Latino...

They're going to take away everything from white people, then surrender to our enemies the terrorists, then open the borders and let all the immigrants in! ... is what I could see many conservatives saying. As for VPs, I think Obama may have to choose Clinton just to smooth ruffled feathers among the party. McCain would definitely choose someone younger, but I'm not exactly sure because he has been very mum on the subject.




Karst

I chose an eternity of this

50 XP

6th January 2005

0 Uploads

4,505 Posts

0 Threads

#4 10 years ago

Clinton wouldn't be a bad choice anyway, since she appeals to exactly those demographic groups that don't care for Obama, the (white) working class and middle aged-older people, particularly women.




Relander

Ambassador

50 XP

8th April 2005

0 Uploads

2,538 Posts

0 Threads

#5 10 years ago
KarstClinton wouldn't be a bad choice anyway, since she appeals to exactly those demographic groups that don't care for Obama, the (white) working class and middle aged-older people, particularly women.

Hillary Clinton has more foreign policy experience than Obama, a strong campaign machinery and she could swing those voters behind Obama but choosing her wouldn't be that smart for the following reasons:

1. Hillary is very polarizing figure and she could eventually increase the Republican turnout just because they hate her guts out. Whitewater and other controversies would also return into the lime light.

2. Hillary and Bill could undermine Obama's credibility as a leader due to their experience and whole Clinton legacy. It's hard to see how such a stubborn fighter as Clinton would play nicely as VP.

3. There are 5 months till elections which is a very long time in politics and long enough to round up former Hillary supporters behind Obama, at least to oppose McCain whose stance on abortion & gun rights is like red for a bull for Democratic women and supporting Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy & pro-business stance aren't popular amongst blue-collar workers.

4. Hillary doesn't bring any swing state into the table. Arizona and Texas are firm Republican strongholds and New Mexico is a swing state anyway. New York and whole northeast coast will vote for a Democrat anyway (except maybe Vermont). Hillary could swing some latino voters in Nevada behind Obama but that may be not enough nor for sure.

Hillary's support and campaigning for Obama is needed but as a VP he could be more of a liability than advantage. Joe Biden doesn't bring any swing state into the table either, he isn't that popular outside Delaware and all he would add to the campaign would be foreign policy experience which isn't enough. Michael Bloomberg is a wealthy social liberal from New York, just what Obama doesn't need in November 2008 ("Two elitist liberals together").

I see three realistic choices for Obama:

* Ted Strickland: Governor of Ohio. He has a lot of experience and he has more conservative record than Democrats nationally by average, getting 'A' from the NRA. He's also popular, even among many Republicans, and he's Governor of a true swing state with 20 electoral votes.

* Ed Rendell: Governor of Pennsylvania. Rendell has a lot of experience as well and he's popular in Pennsylvania which could be a swing state in November 2008.

* Bill Richardson: he would bring New Mexico behind Obama without a doubt and he has impressive record having been US Ambassador to the UN, Secretary of Energy and Governor of New Mexico. Not to mention that he's likeable in the eyes of the people without significant controversies (if any).




Relander

Ambassador

50 XP

8th April 2005

0 Uploads

2,538 Posts

0 Threads

#6 10 years ago

And what comes to the possible choices of John McCain:

Mike Huckabee would bring social conservative votes but not any state as the Southern United States is a Republican stronghold anyways. Furthermore some fiscal conservatives find Huckabee's economic record & stances as moderate-to-liberal and his handling of immigration during his tenure as Governor of Arkansas was slacky.

Charlie Christ is a popular governor of a swing state but his social liberal policies would disenfrancize some social conservatives: moderate-liberal ticket would be poison for many conservative Republicans. Joe Liebermann would be a bad idea due to his social liberal stances and the fact he's a Democrat. Though Mitt Romney is a competent businessman with good record in fiscal issues, he's a mormon and his true social stances would cause doubt in the minds of some Republican voters.

Bobby Jindal is very realistic choice for McCain due to the reasons provided by masked_marsoe.

However in general, VP choice really has little value unless he or she comes from a swing state and is popular there.




Phoenix_22 VIP Member

46 and 2, are just ahead of me

255,785 XP

23rd September 2004

0 Uploads

24,266 Posts

0 Threads

#7 10 years ago
masked_marsoe;4369233Bobby Jindal is another favourite, for the following reasons:
  • He's 36 (compared to Obama's 44, or McCain's 71)
  • Governor of Louisiana (won with an impressive majority, post-Katrina)
  • First generation Indian-American (dots, not feathers =p)
  • Impeccable conservative record
  • Cleaned up corruption, brought in strict ethics laws
  • Classic American Dream character (rags to riches stuff)
  • Impressive experience: "During his tenure as secretary (in his mid-20s), Louisiana's Medicaid program went from bankruptcy with a $400 million deficit into three years of surpluses totaling $220 million."

Only one problem, he doesn't seem too keen on the idea.

As for Obama, Richardson would be a good pick, but there's always the race issue of a black man and a Latino...

I haven't heard much about him until recently and it seems like a ton of Louisiana natives are big fans of his. Also, stepping into the situation in La. after Katrina was a huge risk, but I guess it paid off.

Relander, thanks for the points. Do you really think that swing states will really play such a huge role in the VP choices? I would imagine it to be someone who could broaden the base, Obama would go for someone with experience, while McCain would go for someone with charisma.

I agree with the points about Clinton though, she would be great in the presidential role, but not as a vice president. There is just far too much experience and drive in an Obama - Clinton pairing that would probably cause chaos in the White House. You just can't have three people running a country.




Relander

Ambassador

50 XP

8th April 2005

0 Uploads

2,538 Posts

0 Threads

#8 10 years ago
Phoenix_22Do you really think that swing states will really play such a huge role in the VP choices?

Well I think it will matter the most though it isn't the only thing in choosing the VP, I may have overstated the swing state point.

However I have come to a conclusion that states themselves matter a lot for most Americans as the states and/or regions are quite different from each other in most cases with their own traditions, history, dialect, politics & laws etc. to some extent. Thus it's important for Z people that a candidate for a major national office is from their Z state. It's like voting a countryman for the Secretary General of the UN or Chairman of EU Commission.

I would imagine it to be someone who could broaden the base, Obama would go for someone with experience, while McCain would go for someone with charisma.

Sure, it all comes down to election strategy in both candidates' camps. Obama would need foreign policy experience (and experience in general), social moderate-to-conservative politician or a popular top politician from a true swing state. What McCain would need is a social conservative politician, relatively young candidate or a popular top politician from a true swing state. For both camps it would be optimal if they could find a candidate who would fit in all of the categories they need at Autumn.

For a couple of weeks now I haven't followed the US presidential elections due to my new work and the fact that I have less freetime around, not to mention that other interests have become stronger and it's now 5 months till the elections where as the Democratic race was in the situation where it could end at any day.




Phoenix_22 VIP Member

46 and 2, are just ahead of me

255,785 XP

23rd September 2004

0 Uploads

24,266 Posts

0 Threads

#9 10 years ago

You haven't missed much, since Obama won the nomination they have just been complaining over offshore drilling, a completely other topic for discussion.

But, good points, big populations states that are still battlegrounds like Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida all have VP considerations. After all, the electoral college decides on the President, not the popular vote.