Obama-Biden '08!

I know it's a bit early to be talking about potential vice presidents in an Obama Administration, considering Barack the Builder currently has just 78 of the 2,025 delegates he needs to win the nomination, and is presently, at best, a co-front-runner with Hillary Clinton. Nevertheless, I was delighted to hear this from CNN's Gloria Borger yesterday, on the topic of a possible Hillary & Barack (in whatever order) ticket:

I think it's more likely that Clinton could choose someone like Barack Obama than Barack Obama would pick someone like Hillary Clinton. I think if he were the nominee, he would be more likely to go to somebody like a Joe Biden, with a lot of foreign policy experience.

Yes! Let's get an Obama-Biden boomlet going! Maybe I should start a Facebook group or something. :)

P.S. Here's the video:

P.P.S. Ezra Klein is on the bandwagon. Kevin Drum, too. And Transplanted Texan at MyDD. The groundswell is growing! Joe-mentum!

Comments

[JD]

After seeing them both speak, it makes lots of sense to me. (Which probably means that it won't happen.)

On the other hand, tickets usually strive to include a Southerner. (Note: For modern political purposes, Florida is not part of the South.)

[Mad Max, Esquire]

Richardson for VP. He says some dumb things, but so does Biden. Richardson has a great resume, he's a governor (though in the Southwest) and can help with the Hispanic vote.

[Derek]

First, why would Biden take that position? He could chair the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, maintain his role as one of the most powerful senators... or fly around for four years on Obama's behalf doing a thankless job. If he were Secretary of State, it's plausible. But Obama's got a pair of shortcomings: no executive experience and no foreign policy experience. I would think someone like Richardson might fit that (despite Richardson's own lightning-rod mouth).

Second, do we really want yet another president without foreign policy experience who's forced to rely upon a puppeteer-VP to tell him what to do? Alas, we have the model, I suppose.

[Brian Foster]

This is slightly OT, but back when the relevant post was on the top of the page I was slammed with work so I couldn't jump in.

Back when you suggested the Obama-Edwards VP deal, I wondered whether there was any precedent for a presidential candidate announcing their VP pick before they had the nomination locked up. My recollection is that most of the time, the pick isn't announced until during the convention, or at the most, a week or two before. I was trying to remember if any major candidate had done so this far in advance (even after adjusting for the primary calendar creep -- i.e., I don't mean "January," I mean "before Super Tuesday" or "before at least half the states had held their primaries" or whatever).

FWIW, my sense is that if a candidate did announce their VP pick before they had a virtual lock on the nomination, that would do more harm than good -- what little benefit is derived from a "that makes sense" or "i like that guy" or "now we know what we're gonna get" response would be more than subsumed by a "hold on there fella," "who the hell does he think he is," "you ain't the nominee yet my friend" backlash.

Thoughts?

[texasyank]

Biden, no way, and for one reason.

No one ever tells a Senator to shut up except his wife.

Not so a Veep.

For Biden, this fact alone would be unbearable.

[Derek]

In '76, Reagan picked some guy (I can't recall) shortly before the convention, when it looked like things might be close. Didn't work out for him.

Among other difficulties, I think parties like to have some input into the veep selection, so a candidate picking on his own may decrease the likelihood of winning certain delegates if it's close in the end.

[Brian Foster]

Interesting, I never knew that.

Per wikipedia:

"The 1976 Republican National Convention was held in Kansas City. As the convention began Ford was seen as having a slight lead in delegate votes, but still shy of the 1130 delegates he needed to win. In a bid to woo moderate Northern Republicans, Reagan shocked the convention by announcing that if he won the nomination, Senator Richard Schweiker of Pennsylvania, a moderate, would be his running mate. The move backfired, however, as few moderates switched to Reagan, while many conservative delegates were outraged. Ford defeated Reagan by a narrow margin on the first ballot."

[The Caped Composer]

All these ideas for a double-senator ticket are poison. And I agree with those who said that Biden would never stand for being VP. Furthermore, both he and Richardson have bad cases of "verbal diarrhea."

The Democratic VP needs to be a Western governor. For those who claim that there has to be a southerner on the ticket, I recommend reading _Whistling Past Dixie_ by Thomas Schaller. He elucidates the fact that the south will not vote Democratic any time in the near future, and that the party's growth regions are the upper midwest and the Mountain states. Because Obama is from Illinois, picking a fellow midwesterner would not quite work. If Hillary is the nominee, she could conceivably pick Wisconsin Governor Jim Doyle or former Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack (I prefer Doyle, as he is slightly more progressive and a bit more charismatic, though neither one is a humdinger). If Obama gets the nomination (and I certainly hope he does,) his ideal pick would be Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer. Schweitzer is a visionary who has implemented very progressive environmental policies in his state. He has a 70% popularity rating, and is liked throughout the western states, which, in addition to Montana, could help put Colorado, New Mexico, and maybe even Nevada in play. Schweitzer is also very dynamic on the stump, and can be an "attack dog" against the other side while not coming off as unhinged (the way Jim Webb might). His record of implementing change dovetails perfectly with Obama's message. Personally, I can't think of a better ticket than Obama/Schweitzer '08.