"A Clinton-Obama Presidental Bid?"

[Ramo]

It would help if youd use names, I cant keep track of every GOP resume. Anyway. Lt gov aint shi*t, and mayor of Richmond aint Mayor of NY.

TX Gov ain't ****, either. The point is that all the serious contenders (Romney, Thompson, Giuliani, and Huckabee in that order) aren't steeped in experience. I guess Newt is now a possibility, but in that case Clinton could select Noam Chomsky and still win...

Somehow Im not surprised

But it's not his politics that I'm objecting to (all the other guys I mentioned are quite moderate). This is all electoral strategory. I do think that his Senate votes, particularly recent ones relating to the Iraq war, are unneeded baggage (and we saw the damage that kind of ambiguity did in 2004), and that he has limited appeal in swing states under a Clinton nomination scenario.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Ramo

It would help if youd use names, I cant keep track of every GOP resume. Anyway. Lt gov aint shi*t, and mayor of Richmond aint Mayor of NY.

TX Gov ain't ****, either.

Well duh, and now after 8 years of dubya, not to mention the post 9-11 world, I suspect the middle is more concerned about experience than it was in the happy silly time when Chandra Levy dominated the headlines. Anyway, people here governor, and think its as important as what the governor is in THEIR state. Lt Gov aint worth sh*t hardly anywhere.

The point is that all the serious contenders (Romney, Thompson, Giuliani, and Huckabee in that order) aren't steeped in experience. I guess Newt is now a possibility, but in that case Clinton could select Noam Chomsky and still win...

Giuliani was Mayor of NYC for some time, and thats "the second hardest job in America" or so its been said, and dont think those quotes wont be recirced. Romney was Gubernor AND Senator, right, and has at least that healthcare plan to his name. No big legislative accomplishments HERE last time I looked.

Somehow Im not surprised

But it's not his politics that I'm objecting to (all the other guys I mentioned are quite moderate).

Kaine endorsed Obama and has been getting nice words from Kos et al. Theres moderates and moderates as you well know. Theres the moderates certain folks like KOS et al like, cause theyre electable, and there are moderates they hate with a passion, like Biden, and Hillary. Im not saying YOU hate Hillary with a passion, but I dont think the fact that you like some moderates demonstrates in itself that you dont dislike Bayh for his politics.

[q] and that he has limited appeal in swing states under a Clinton nomination scenario.

Im still not sure he couldnt pull Indiana, and even influence Ohio.

Im really not sure Kaine could even take Virginia, hes not as popular as Warner was, AFAICT. Though Clinton might take Virginia anyway.

[Wiglaf]

Originally posted by hexagonian
You put Obama on the ticket, and you do what no other candidate has successfully done in the past.

Galvanize the black vote.

And with the Republican party in shambles, the dems go for the throat with Clinton/Obama.

What? Plenty of candidates galvanize the black vote. What you would also be doing, however, is galvanizing the racist vote.

[Ramo]

Lt Gov aint worth sh*t hardly anywhere.

It's a pretty powerful position in TX.

Romney was Gubernor AND Senator, right

No...

Giuliani was Mayor of NYC for some time, and thats "the second hardest job in America" [..] and [Romney] has at least that healthcare plan to his name.

One that he's running away from, incidentally. And like I was saying, Kaine isn't running for Pres...

Kaine endorsed Obama and has been getting nice words from Kos et al.

Kos "likes" red state moderates. He doesn't like blue state moderates (i.e. Biden or Clinton). He's a partisan first.

The main reason why Kaine got good words from Kos was that he was a Democrat running for a competitive open seat in a red state. And it helped that he doesn't get on Sunday morning teevee every week and consistently undercut the Dem message. It also helped that it was the most prominent 2005 race. Warner would have much the same support if his candidacy were the least bit threatened.

And I don't know why you think that Obama is a crazy left wing radical. 'Cuz he's not. His candidacy is a little more liberal than Clinton's, and a little more moderate than Edwards'. The netroots don't particularly like him (the last DKos straw poll showed him with half the support of Edwards and twice the support of Clinton).

As for Bayh's politics in particular, I feel much the same way about him that I feel about the other guys I mentioned not named Wesley Clark.

Im really not sure Kaine could even take Virginia, hes not as popular as Warner was, AFAICT.

Yeah, but very few politicians are (incidentally, his popularity has waned a little bit). Kaine still has a quite respectable ~20% net favorability.

[lord of the mark]

[QUOTE] Originally posted by Ramo

Lt Gov aint worth sh*t hardly anywhere.

It's a pretty powerful position in TX.

Great, so in Texas theyll hear Kaine was Lt gov and be impressed. Alot of good thats gonna do the dem ticket.

Romney was Gubernor AND Senator, right

No...

Okay, I got confusled.

Giuliani was Mayor of NYC for some time, and thats "the second hardest job in America" [..] and [Romney] has at least that healthcare plan to his name.

One that he's running away from, incidentally.

Still a bigger deal than Kaine.

And like I was saying, Kaine isn't running for Pres...

No, but if he is the Veep candidate, on a campaign that is plugging competency and experience, hed need to have some.

Kaine endorsed Obama and has been getting nice words from Kos et al.

Kos "likes" red state moderates. He doesn't like blue state moderates (i.e. Biden or Clinton). He's a partisan first.

First, Im not sure Id categorize Delaware quite that way. Its trended Dem lately, but hasnt always. Certainly it wouldnt if the Dems came out against the interests of the credit card lenders, which the Kossacks make a big deal about whenever they discuss Biden. Second, he bitterly assaulted Harris Miller who was also a red state moderate, though with different emphases than Webb, who the Kossacks supported.

The main reason why Kaine got good words from Kos was that he was a Democrat running for a competitive open seat in a red state. And it helped that he doesn't get on Sunday morning teevee every week and consistently undercut the Dem message.

Biden, clinton, and Miller did that? Or even Jane Harman? Leiberman is hardly the only Dem the Kossacks have been bitter about.

It also helped that it was the most prominent 2005 race. Warner would have much the same support if his candidacy were the least bit threatened.

[/q]And I don't know why you think that Obama is a crazy left wing radical. 'Cuz he's not. His candidacy is a little more liberal than Clinton's,[/q]

hes not, on traditional Soc Dem standards. But the Kossacks aint soc dems. They are a certain variety of bourgeois progressive. And yeah, even on those standards, Obama isnt THAT far from Hillary. But hes far enough to not generally inspire the hatred that Hillary does.

and a little more moderate than Edwards'. The netroots don't particularly like him (the last DKos straw poll showed him with half the support of Edwards and twice the support of Clinton).

If Edwards goes down first, the opinion makers in that tendency will go to Obama, not Clinton.

As for Bayh's politics in particular, I feel much the same way about him that I feel about the other guys I mentioned not named Wesley Clark.

Ok.

Im really not sure Kaine could even take Virginia, hes not as popular as Warner was, AFAICT.

Yeah, but very few politicians are (incidentally, his popularity has waned a little bit).

From when he was elected essentially on Warners popularity.

Kaine still has a quite respectable ~20% net favorability.

I dont know the poll numbers, I just dont feel the vibe of excitement around here.

[Ramo]

No, but if he is the Veep candidate, on a campaign that is plugging competency and experience, hed need to have some

And like I keep saying practically as much experience as the GOP frontrunner for President is plenty.

First, Im not sure Id categorize Delaware quite that way. Its trended Dem lately, but hasnt always.

Of course not, but Kos wasn't around before it became a solid Dem state.

Certainly it wouldnt if the Dems came out against the interests of the credit card lenders, which the Kossacks make a big deal about whenever they discuss Biden.

If they shouldn't discuss important votes that should be a gimme for what the Democrats fundamentally stand for, why should they discuss? The Bankruptcy Bill was a huge deal, like it or not. As for the credit card companies, I doubt that they have that much influence beyond campaign contributions (or else Kerry wouldn't have won the state by a solid margin). Which is less of an issue in the post-Kos world. Certainly Biden could've survived that vote. He's as safe as can be...

Biden, clinton, and Miller did that? Or even Jane Harman? Leiberman is hardly the only Dem the Kossacks have been bitter about.

There are primaries and the netroots generally support those who support their positions amongst electable candidates. War, civili liberties, and trade are important to this demographic. This is reflected in whom they throw their support to.

BTW, Clinton and Biden are in fundamentally different categories. Lieberman is even more distinct (the latest travesty is that he was the only non-Republican to filibuster the Specter/Leahy Habeas Corpus Restoration Act).

And Webb was definitely more electable than Miller, and that was a lot more important to the opinion makers than H1B Visas.

As for Harman, there's even buyers' remorse in the blogosphere (Reyes isn't particularly loyal). And again, she's in a blue seat and in a blue House

I dont know the poll numbers, I just dont feel the vibe of excitement around here.

I can't imagine that there's any excitement about Bayh...

[Ramo]

VA #'s from SUSA (9/14-9/16) +/- 4.5%:

Clinton (D) 50%, Giuliani (R) 44%
Clinton (D) 50%, Thompson (R) 43%
Clinton (D) 53%, Romney (R) 38%
Obama (D) 46%, Giuliani (R) 45%
Thompson (R) 47%, Obama (D) 45%
Obama (D) 50%, Romney (R) 38%
Edwards (D) 48%, Giuliani (R) 43%
Edwards (D) 49%, Thompson (R) 39%
Edwards (D) 52%, Romney (R) 33%

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReportEmail.aspx?g=3884ab12-ca1b-4fcf-aa6f-02a1f182e95d

I doubt we're going to see these kinds of numbers from IN.

[Ramo]

hes not, on traditional Soc Dem standards.

Like what?

[lord of the mark]

[QUOTE] Originally posted by Ramo

No, but if he is the Veep candidate, on a campaign that is plugging competency and experience, hed need to have some

And like I keep saying practically as much experience as the GOP frontrunner for President is plenty.

Any my point is the GOP is going to run on ideology, not experience.

First, Im not sure Id categorize Delaware quite that way. Its trended Dem lately, but hasnt always.

Of course not, but Kos wasn't around before it became a solid Dem state.

Certainly it wouldnt if the Dems came out against the interests of the credit card lenders, which the Kossacks make a big deal about whenever they discuss Biden.

If they shouldn't discuss important votes that should be a gimme for what the Democrats fundamentally stand for, why should they discuss? The Bankruptcy Bill was a huge deal, like it or not. As for the credit card companies, I doubt that they have that much influence beyond campaign contributions (or else Kerry wouldn't have won the state by a solid margin). Which is less of an issue in the post-Kos world. Certainly Biden could've survived that vote. He's as safe as can be...

I think most folks in Del understand the importance of the banks to employment and state revenues there, so no, its not all about contributions. And they certainly expect more local concern from their own Senator than from a Prez candidate. And you stay safe by taking care of local interests.

Biden, clinton, and Miller did that? Or even Jane Harman? Leiberman is hardly the only Dem the Kossacks have been bitter about.

There are primaries and the netroots generally support those who support their positions amongst electable candidates. War, civili liberties, and trade are important to this demographic. This is reflected in whom they throw their support to.

And what we were talking about, was who would be chosen as VEEP. So Id say they, and you supports those who support their views among electable candidates.

BTW, Clinton and Biden are in fundamentally different categories.

Maybe in terms of the posters on Kos. Here in the grassroots, (in NoVa, not RL) I hear from people who "would never vote for Hillary, she killed people for politics" (in reference to her vote on Iraq).

I dont know the poll numbers, I just dont feel the vibe of excitement around here.

I can't imagine that there's any excitement about Bayh... [/Q]

In Virginia? No. I think there might be in Indiana, though.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Ramo
VA #'s from SUSA (9/14-9/16) +/- 4.5%:

Clinton (D) 50%, Giuliani (R) 44%
Clinton (D) 50%, Thompson (R) 43%
Clinton (D) 53%, Romney (R) 38%
Obama (D) 46%, Giuliani (R) 45%
Thompson (R) 47%, Obama (D) 45%
Obama (D) 50%, Romney (R) 38%
Edwards (D) 48%, Giuliani (R) 43%
Edwards (D) 49%, Thompson (R) 39%
Edwards (D) 52%, Romney (R) 33%

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReportEmail.aspx?g=3884ab12-ca1b-4fcf-aa6f-02a1f182e95d

I doubt we're going to see these kinds of numbers from IN.

exactly. Clinton can win Virginia without Kaine.

[Ramo]

[q]Any my point is the GOP is going to run on ideology, not experience[/quote]

Then what's the problem with a smaller resume Veep?

I think most folks in Del understand the importance of the banks to employment and state revenues there, so no, its not all about contributions. And they certainly expect more local concern from their own Senator than from a Prez candidate. And you stay safe by taking care of local interests.

So you're saying that the same electorate who gave a candidate who would've a vetoed the Bankruptcy Bill a solid victory margin, would kick out Biden for casting a vote out of 100 against it?

And what we were talking about, was who would be chosen as VEEP. So Id say they, and you supports those who support their views among electable candidates.

And what left wing view does Kaine have that Bayh doesn't? Besides the DP, there isn't much else AFAIK.

And once again, I didn't say that I support Kaine as Veep. Just that he's a better strategic choice than Bayh (and I think that Strickland is an even better choice). In the event of a Clinton nomination, again, I support Clark.

Maybe in terms of the posters on Kos.

Then why are you always bring up Kos when you mean miscellaneous people you run into on the street? Some posters might never vote for Clinton in the general, but that's hardly a dominant school of thought, certainly not among the front-pagers.

exactly. Clinton can win Virginia without Kaine.

Maybe. A lead barely outside the margin of error in a poll a year and a quarter out isn't something to hang your hat on. This poll indicates that VA is a swing state.

[lord of the mark]

[QUOTE] Originally posted by Ramo

I think most folks in Del understand the importance of the banks to employment and state revenues there, so no, its not all about contributions. And they certainly expect more local concern from their own Senator than from a Prez candidate. And you stay safe by taking care of local interests.

So you're saying that the same electorate who gave a candidate who would've a vetoed the Bankruptcy Bill a solid victory margin, would kick out Biden for casting a vote out of 100 against it?

Running for Senate is a different matter than running for prez, thats a huge topic.

And what we were talking about, was who would be chosen as VEEP. So Id say they, and you supports those who support their views among electable candidates.

And what left wing view does Kaine have that Bayh doesn't? Besides the DP, there isn't much else AFAIK.

For policy views of Bayh which youve already mentioned, and in general a long association with the DLC, vs an association with Webb et al. Politics isnt just checking off positions, its about alliances and orientations.

Maybe in terms of the posters on Kos.

Then why are you always bring up Kos when you mean miscellaneous people you run into on the street? Some posters might never vote for Clinton in the general, but that's hardly a dominant school of thought, certainly not among the front-pagers.

I dont check Kos regularly. For me Kossack is a shorthand for all the folks in the party, including other bloggers, code pink folks (And yes, they were here and fighting for Webb) etc who think the Dems arent partisan enough, that the DLC is "evil", etc, etc. I will try to find a better word.

exactly. Clinton can win Virginia without Kaine.

Maybe. A lead barely outside the margin of error in a poll a year and a quarter out isn't something to hang your hat on. This poll indicates that VA is a swing state. [/Q]

Well nothing a year and a quarter out is reliable. Not polls in VA, not polls in Indiana, not the situation on the ground in Iraq, not a lot of things.

[Ramo]

Running for Senate is a different matter than running for prez, thats a huge topic

Like the fact that incumbents who've been in the Senate for decades, Ranking Member of a major Senate Cmte, not involved in major scandals, and are in the same party as their electorate's preferred Pres. candidate are generally safe?

For policy views of Bayh which youve already mentioned

I only mentioned Iraq, specifically Reid-Feingold. I wasn't aware that Kaine opposed the invasion in 2003 or supports Reid-Feingold.

and in general a long association with the DLC, vs an association with Webb et al

Who's associated with teh Reagan...

You could base your views of politics on a 6 degrees of Kevin Bacon principle, but would lead to rather silly results....

I dont check Kos regularly. For me Kossack is a shorthand for all the folks in the party, including other bloggers, code pink folks (And yes, they were here and fighting for Webb) etc who think the Dems arent partisan enough, that the DLC is "evil", etc, etc. I will try to find a better word.

You can be partisan or not like the DLC and be pragmatic about it. It seems like you're lumping all the lefties that you don't like together, without regard to huge gulfs in ideology and pragmatism...

Incidentally, Webb voted against Reid-Feingold, while Clinton voted for it.

[Ramo]

Well nothing a year and a quarter out is reliable. Not polls in VA, not polls in Indiana, not the situation on the ground in Iraq, not a lot of things.

Obviously, I'm strategizing based on the current political climate.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Ramo

Running for Senate is a different matter than running for prez, thats a huge topic

Like the fact that incumbents who've been in the Senate for decades, Ranking Member of a major Senate Cmte, not involved in major scandals, and are in the same party as their electorate's preferred Pres. candidate are generally safe?

Like the fact that Senators are expected to look out for state interests, and in fact people heavily vote on those, while for president theyre more likely to look to national issues. Look, you can keep being obtuse if you want to.

For policy views of Bayh which youve already mentioned

I only mentioned Iraq, specifically Reid-Feingold. I wasn't aware that Kaine opposed the invasion in 2003 or supports Reid-Feingold.

No, he didnt have to vote either way. Like Warner.

and in general a long association with the DLC, vs an association with Webb et al

Who's associated with teh Reagan...

Yeah, thats what gives all the "progressives" orgasms, see we've got somebody whos a gung ho "realist" who liked killing Nicaraguan peasants, but who isnt for all this neocon chickenhawk democracy promotion ****. Like Zinni, and Clark, some others. Webbs the current poster boy though.

You could base your views of politics on a 6 degrees of Kevin Bacon principle, but would lead to rather silly results....

Not six degress, no sir.

You can be partisan or not like the DLC and be pragmatic about it. It seems like you're lumping all the lefties that you don't like together, without regard to huge gulfs in ideology and pragmatism...

There are moderate, pragmatic neocons, (like Kagan) and there wild eyed folks (who can be found on the pages of the Wash Times) and folks in between. The flavor of their politics has enough in common to justify a common term. Ditto for the guys Im talking about.


[/q]Incidentally, Webb voted against Reid-Feingold, while Clinton voted for it.

Clinton also didnt attack Moveon for their Betray us add, while ISTR Obama did. Clintons in a bind cause of her own positions in the past, at least for a few more months.