 |
Mental Masturbation: Obama’s VP…Sebelius? Schweitzer? |
 |
Because brainstorming about Obama’s VP pick is an incredibly fruitful activity, I thought I’d jump into the fray. We’ve been hearing Kathleen Sebelius’ name a lot recently: she lost Open Left and Dailykos’ straw poll by two votes (to Bill Richardson). Bowers says she is the best choice of major Democrats who have endorsed Obama; the main reason, he says, is that she opposed the Iraq war from the start. And some are speculating that Obama’s Vote for Change video, which features Sebelius, signals that he is considering her for the VP slot.
To put it very simply, Sebelius’ perceived advantages seem to be the following:
1. She is a popular governor.
2. She is from a “Red State.”
3. She is female.
4. She has a record of “reaching across the aisle.”
5. She is polished.
I’m not sure any of those advantages are winners. To be clear, I support female candidates, but if that’s a criterion I wonder whether someone like Janet Napolitano might not be a better choice. And I have my own reasons, which no one agrees with but me (hey, that happens in politics sometimes), for not being completely comfortable with Sebelius.
Plus, I like Brian Schweitzer better. He brings the “Red State” cred, he frames progressive messages really well, and he would provide the “reinforcing” of Obama’s message that Bowers always says is so credible. And he would reinforce not just by being polished, but by being passionate.
But I’ll leave you to judge. Schweitzer and Sebelius aren’t the only two choices, of course, but I’m going to start pushing his name, so I might as well compare him to the (online) frontrunner, eh?
What follows are two clips that I consider decently representative. Feel free to leave your opinion in the comments.
Schweitzer is also very pro-gun, and as we all know, being anti-gun has cause us Dems to lose Congress and Presidential elections left and right.
Strong individual rights finding in Heller vs. DC would force Obama away from the hardcore anti-gun shriekers in the Democratic party.
Then taking Schweitzer as VP would nullify a lot of the anti-gun perception of Dems.
Obama has an opportunity to eradicate the anti-gun perception of Dems in one fell swoop and win the election.
As a Montana girl, I could not be more pleased that our Gov is even being mentioned as a possibility. He understands the necessity of encouraging American business development without sacrificing the American worker or the American environment on the altar of corporate greed. He is a most pragmatic man with a strong vision of what our possibilities are as a country. He is strong on personal freedoms and works for the betterment of his constituents. No limos or private jets here. And he brings his dogs with him on PR visits, he is easy to relate to as a person, and he doesn’t fall into the Politician stereotype.
I like Schweitzer too, he’s a good guy…however, I have a different choice for VP. First off, it has to be a Clinton supporter. Here are two possible picks: NC Governor Mike Easely OR my boy General Wes Clark. The General, former supreme allied commander of NATO and Vietnam Vet might cut into McCain’s soon to be mentioned in a debate and in commercials as though not everyone knows Military Experience. My Uncle, an Army Ranger out here in Seattle, told me that if Kerry, KERRY of all people, had chosen Clark he would’ve voted for him in a heartbeat. Also, Clark is from Arkansas and would put more states in play than Schweitzer (even though I think Montana will go blue anyway). Easley is a southern Governor who’s relatively young, but I think Clark gives the military experience that will take away a lot of McCain’s arguments in the future. I mean, if I had any say in it that’s what I’d recommend.
It’s odd, your criteria are the opposite of those I usually hear. People say Obama should pick an Obama supporter as a “reinforcing” candidate. I can understand, I think, why you would recommend a Clinton supporter though.
With Wes Clark, I worry that he would be seen or portrayed as “fringe-y” and even depicted as a traitor.
What’s your opinion of Sebelius?
A Clinton supporter, in my opinion, is a reinforcing candidate within the Party because it gives Hillary’s base of support more reason to vote for Obama other than the fact that he’s a fellow democrat. Also, Clark has appeal amongst Independents, Veterans, and certain Republican demographics. I like Sebelius a lot, however, I’d be worried about an African American top of the ticket and Female VP candidate…just seems to me that the average voter might think that’s just too much too soon. Old voters fear change (as evident by the West Virginia exit polls). Let the party establishment (Clintonistas that just got their ass kicked) feel more at ease with their guy (I stress ‘guy’) in the #2 seat…plus someone has to have military experience, but Clark (unlike Hillary at #2) wouldn’t overshadow Obama but rather be the VP attack dog that Edwards didn’t have the balls to be. Besides, you don’t want 2 people who think exactly alike…just 2 people that agree on the same principles…it’s makes for a more balanced ticket. The Democratic Party and new voters already expressed Change and that’s why Obama is soon to be the Nominee…now the Party has to focus on the general election and how to make sure all Democrats and independents and even some Republicans actually vote for him. As of right now, Evangelicals don’t have a reason to vote for McCain, so part of the balancing act for the Democrats is to make sure it stays that way. Just a few thoughts.