• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Obama's Veep team floats Republican name

disneydude

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 30, 2006
Messages
25,528
Reaction score
8,470
Location
Los Angeles
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
The article is here:

Obama veep team floats Republican name - Yahoo! News


I would love to see Obama go out on a limb and choose a Republican for his VP. Obama represents a real change from the same old usual politics that McCain represents.
Reaching across the aisle and choosing a Republican I think would show that Obama is willing to begin work on the real and difficult job of repairing the cultural divide that GWB used in his attempts to find political advantage.
We desperately need someone to bring this country back together. I have my doubts that this article is correct....but I would love it if it is.
 
This really isn't surprising, and shows exactly where Obama and the republicrats stand - together.
 
disneydude said:
The article is here:

Obama veep team floats Republican name - Yahoo! News


I would love to see Obama go out on a limb and choose a Republican for his VP. Obama represents a real change from the same old usual politics that McCain represents.
Click to expand...

Wait a minute. We're gonna play the same game with these little barbs thrown in at McCain that gets done with Obama.

Please explain to me, in detail with examples to contrast, what you mean by "the same old usual politics that McCain represents".

I would like to know how you think to make such a subjective assertion stick.
 

I think its rather clear what I mean.

This election represents are VERY distinct difference between two candidates:

Do we want to elect an old lifetime politician who has spent practically his entire adult life in Washington
or do we want to elect a young less experienced person who hasn't spent his entire life in Washington.

Thats what I mean.

Picking a Republican as VP, although I seriously doubt it would ever happen, would be a welcome signal that Obama is not going to be the typical politician.
 
Senator Obama almost certainly will not choose her for his running mate. He will choose someone who is visible and widely-known. Ms. Veneman does not fit that bill. If he chooses a Republican, which I don't think will happen, it would probably be someone of Colin Powell's stature. My personal opinion is that perhaps the strongest team Senator Obama could put together would be an Obama-Richardson team. Governor Bill Richardson has experience in energy (headed the Energy Department), international affairs (U.S. Ambassador to the UN + direct negotiating experience), and as an executive as Governor of New Mexico.

Having said that, it does make sense to float names like Ms. Veneman's. The Obama campaign can only benefit from describing a VP selection process that is reaching across party lines to examine prospective running mates.
 

That experience would prove helpful in figuring out the ins & outs of the UN with regard to the Global Poverty bill which would levy a UN tax on all American taxpayers.

There are several pieces that might fit together but it's difficult to see exactly how. But the UN and the income redistribution and his experience in organizing poor people and his wanting to test his appeal to see if it transcended national boundaries (by giving a speech in Germany and interacting with the various leaders of the world) are all important parts to a puzzle only Obama sees as yet.
 
Bhkad,

Although there will almost certainly be the invariable errors along the way, it appears to me that the Obama campaign has been very good at gearing tactics to its strategic ends. Hence, his VP pick will almost certainly be someone who shares his overarching vision and has competence and credibility with respect to Senator Obama's major objectives.
 

That's just what I was going to say!

:mrgreen:
 

So then, you were being totally subjective and had no intention of making a valid point. You just wanted to backhand McCain and let me just let it slide. I'll remember that next time you start bitching about attacks on Obama.
 
jallman said:
So then, you were being totally subjective and had no intention of making a valid point. You just wanted to backhand McCain and let me just let it slide. I'll remember that next time you start bitching about attacks on Obama.
Click to expand...

There is nothing subjective about it:

McCain is a lifetime politician. Obama has very little experience. Its a clear issue for the voters.

Some people will find that McCain's lifetime service is a positive thing and will give him the experience to be President. Those people will find Obama's lack of experience to be a detraction from his capacity to be President.

Other people will find that Obama's lack of being a lifetime politician a positive thing and will find this to be a change from the Washington politics as usual. Those people will find McCain's lifetime political career as a detraction because they want someone who hasn't spent his entire life in Washington.

Its not a backhand at McCain at all.....it is the simple facts that the voters will face....and you can't get any clearer than this.

The post is as much a backhand at Obama as it is at McCain...and is as much a commendation of McCain as it is of Obama....depending upon the perspective you come from.

The point being....I was suggesting that Obama going out of a limb and picking a moderate Republican as VP would be a further indication that he is not your lifetime Washington Politician. I consider that to be a good thing....you might feel differently....
 
disneydude said:
There is nothing subjective about it:

McCain is a lifetime politician. Obama has very little experience. Its a clear issue for the voters.
Click to expand...

I'm glad that you confess that key issue.


That's not how you presented your point. You presented the point with a very negative connotation directed at McCain. There was no statement of fact in it at all...something about "same old politics". Please show how McCain's politics are old or the same as whatever nebulous body you were comparing it to.

[/QUOTE]

I don't trust anything Obama does at this point. Not a word that comes out of his mouth holds any sincerity and I find his truthfulness suspect at all times since he pulled his "I'm not campaigning, scouts' honor" routine while he was blatantly campaigning and choosing his stops based on where he could get a photo op.

He could choose a republican, but that doesn't mean I am going to trust that republican for hopping into bed with him either.
 
In yet another indication that the Obama campaign is attempting to position itself as transcending partisan divisions, Agence France Presse revealed:

Campaign aides told AFP that two former top members of President George W. Bush's administration -- treasury secretary Paul O'Neill and Securities and Exchange commissioner William Donaldson -- were joining the Obama panel.

From a strategic sense, it appears that the Obama campaign is nurturing a public perception that it is bipartisan in nature from its reaching across Party lines. Previously, the Obama campaign has praised Defense Secretary Robert Gates' performance and floated the name of former Bush Administration Agriculture Department Secretary Ann Veneman as a possible VP selection. One should be aware that visible involvement by Republicans can create and reinforce the perception that an Obama administration would carry out a bipartisan governing approach. Over time, such expectations, especially as visible actions are more credible than promises of bipartisanship, can harden. All said, the early involvement of Republicans may wind up being a crucial investment for the Obama campaign in its bid to weaken Senator McCain's base.

To blunt such a challenge, the McCain campaign could bring some Clinton Administration or Clinton campaign officials on board in an advisory capacity, and sooner rather than later. Once the Conventions have been held, there would be a real risk that such a move would merely be seen as a less meaningful indicator of Senator McCain's governing approach.

In sum, the Obama campaign's reaching out to Republicans highlights anew the strategic depth of that organization. At the same time, the McCain campaign has some time to counter, but early action would likely have a bigger impact than later action on that front.​
 
Last edited:
disneydude said:
More information:

Ann Veneman - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

She sounds pretty good to me. Not a crazy wacko right-wing Republican....but a moderate/conservative.
Click to expand...

If they are suggesting that she is to be Obama's running mate then most likely she is no conservative and moderate these days just mean a liberal who is too ashamed to admit he or she is a liberal.
 
jamesrage said:
If they are suggesting that she is to be Obama's running mate then most likely she is no conservative and moderate these days just mean a liberal who is too ashamed to admit he or she is a liberal.
Click to expand...

Or it could mean some people are so far on one side of the political scale they consider everything to be liberal or conservative.
 
Khayembii Communique said:
This really isn't surprising, and shows exactly where Obama and the republicrats stand - together.
Click to expand...

I think division is a good thing among the political parties because when they start working together it is to usually screw you like the McCain/Kennedy/Bush Amensty.
 
jamesrage said:
I think division is a good thing among the political parties because when they start working together it is to usually screw you like the McCain/Kennedy/Bush Amensty.
Click to expand...

That was out of political necessity. The GOP got the help of Hispanics in 2000 and 2004. If they alienated 40% of Hispanics it would mean heavy loses in the next presidential election. McCain's state is full of Hispanics. It wouldn't be savvy for him to attack a large voting block. It wasn't because they genuinely wanted a bi-partisan effort. It was more or less 'for the good of the party'.
 

Interesting situation. Venneman is also on McCain's list, albeit a longshot. I would like to see a catfight between Obummer and McCrazy over her. I am scalping tickets for the event as I speak. :mrgreen:
 
Last edited:
Earlier today, I noted that from a strategic sense, it appears that the Obama campaign is nurturing a public perception that it is bipartisan in nature from its reaching across Party lines. This evening, the Financial Times quoted former Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers and Gene Sperling, who served as director of the National Economic Council under President Clinton, to that effect. The newspaper reported:

“Senator Obama is trying to transcend the traditional cleavages by building a bipartisan consensus to tackle the short-term economic challenges so that we are then in a position to address the longer-term structural economic challenges,” said Lawrence Summers, the former Democratic Treasury secretary, who attended the meeting. Mr Summers added that he doubted Mr McCain would invite him to attend an equivalent event.

Gene Sperling, an adviser to the Obama campaign and former senior official in the Bill Clinton administration, said: “If you can attract senior Republican figures to an economic summit in the July before an election, then you are sending a strong message of bipartisan credibility. It is really doubtful Senator McCain could emulate this.”

It remains to be seen whether the McCain campaign will be able to answer back by showcasing some prominent Democrats in its corner. Whether or not it does could make a difference in credibility on the issue of which campaign can reach across the aisle to build broad bipartisan support for the difficult policy decisions that lie ahead.

For now, from a strategic standpoint, the Obama campaign appears to be seizing the initiative in a growing number of areas ranging from a mini-economic summit to constructing a bipartisan team. Over time, a consistently proactive approach can enable a campaign to increasingly define the flow of events. When that happens, such a campaign can see the advantages of its superior strategy begin to translate into a sustainable edge in the polls.

At this point in time, the area of energy policy remains wide open. Each candidate has offered some modest proposals. Neither has unveiled a bold Manhattan- or Apollo-style project for energy. The candidate who does could well seize a critical advantage on energy policy.​
 

You know how your levels of understanding of a subject go from superficial to an awakening to things hidden beneath the surface to a real detailed knowledge of the subject?

You and the American people are still at the superficial level of understanding Obama.

I am at the Awakening Stage.

As time goes by I will share with you what I discover.

But it looks really bad for Obama.
 



Seems to me that Senator Obama has been spending a lot of time with Chuck Hagel lately.



< Chuck Hagel is a Republican senator from Nebraska. He's a decorated Vietnam veteran and an articulate, thoughtful man who last year considered jumping into the race himself, and has been talked about as a possible running mate for Mike Bloomberg, should he decide to run. Although a social conservative, he's been a thorn in the side of the Bush/Cheney administration with his criticism of their Iraq policy, and is basically on the same page as the Democrats on the issue.>


Obama/Hagel '08: Is it Time for a Bipartisan Ticket?
 
In yet another shrewd move to demonstrate to voters that he is already working on a bipartisan basis and not merely saying that he will, Senator Obama locked up a commitment with Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson under which the Treasury Secretary would confer with Obama on financial market developments. CBS reported:

Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson has agreed to confer with Barack Obama, the Democrats' presumptive presidential nominee, about developments in the financial markets during the homestretch of his campaign against Republican John McCain, an Obama aide said Tuesday.

In contrast, Senator McCain pledged to work with a Democratic Congress if he is elected. The San Francisco Chronicle reported:

"I promise you that I respect her," he said, "I will sit down with her when I'm president, and will say 'let's work together," he said. "If (the late House Speaker) Tip O'Neill and (President) Ronald Reagan could, then certainly John McCain and Nancy Pelosi can .... I think she's been very effective."

From a strategic standpoint, once more Senator Obama's hand proved superior to Senator McCain's. While he locked up a commitment from Secretary Paulson, Senator McCain could only promise to work with House Speak Pelosi if he is elected. Should the present strategic imbalance between the two campaigns continue, it will begin to take a toll on the campaign that is at a persistent disadvantage.​
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…