Obama's VP List: MSNBC Gathers Names

From NBC's Chuck Todd and Domenico Montanaro:

So you think you know who's on Obama's veep short list? Well, think again. According to sources on the Hill, Obama veep vetters -- specifically Jim Johnson and Eric Holder -- have been asking Dem members of Congress this week their input about potential running mates. The conversations are free-flowing but one name the vetters are inserting in the conversations is one that is not a household name... Ret. Gen. James Jones, the former Marine-turned-NATO Supreme Allied Commander. ...

Besides Jones, the other names on the list bandied about with congressional Dems include (and not in any order): Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, John Edwards, Evan Bayh, Kathleen Sebelius, Ted Strickland, Mark Warner, Tim Kaine, Jim Webb, Bill Nelson, Jack Reed, Joe Biden, Chris Dodd, Tom Daschle, and Sam Nunn. You'll notice a few names NOT on this list (that's not my exclusion -- hint hint). Besides Jones, I'm told the two other names that invited extended discussion were Biden and Strickland.

* * *

The Huffington Post recently published profiles on two of the top names on the list: Jim Webb and Kathleen Sebelius. For more on Obama's veepstakes, check out HuffPost's rundown list of the pros and cons of the potential vice president candidates.

Comments

[inwonderland]

10:44 PM on 06/17/2008

A outside the box guess...ma­ybe a wish from an Obama supporter?

CHUCK HEGEL, CHUCK HEGEL AND CHUCK HEGEL.

Stranger things could happen, but maybe nothing better.

Think about it.

Republican and Democrat
War hero, and political hero
Right and Left
Black and White
Two unexpected­s
Long experience and proven judgment
Political shock and awe amidst

Unity, Unity, Unity and more Unity.

Only Obama could do this, unless McCain chooses Lieberman, but they are both Republican­s no matter the Lieberman seating in the Senate. Lieberman with Gore AND with McCain!!!
Zero credibilit­y for Joe and
Joe.... we hardly knew ya.

[bosse]

11:09 AM on 06/16/2008

Boy it looks like, your list do not include any real winners. For shameful reasons, many do not like women in leader positions. Dachle, even tho a great man, could not even win his state.
Nunn is so unattaraci­ve, and old, and not well known except by Wshington press., and educated people.
Bayh of Indiana, is better, if Hillary is rejected/
Napolitano­, will give Mc Cain afight for his money, and will be interestin­g. Will bring in many Catholics.
But if we can geta great Ohioan, or Florida leader, the ticket will be unbeatable

[MrXfromplanetX]

12:31 PM on 06/14/2008

Dennis Kucinich is the only Democrat who ran on the platform of restoring the Constituti­on. Dennis Kucinich voted against the Reauthoriz­ation of the Patriot Act.

Let's look at who voted for it, and hold them accountabl­e
http://www­.govtrack.­us/congres­s/vote.xpd­?vote=s200­6-29
http://www­.govtrack.­us/congres­s/vote.xpd­?vote=h200­5-414

Kucinich is the only person in office who keeps calling for Bush and Cheney to be impeached.

Check out the videos of his speeches on Youtube.

I would gain a great deal of confidence in Obama, if he picked Dennis Kucinich.

[bosse]

11:10 AM on 06/16/2008

I agree, but many women vote for good looking men! Shame you.
Ron Taul will be a great asset too ktb

[MrXfromplanetX]

12:02 PM on 06/14/2008

One Democrat ran on the platform of restoring the Constituti­on . . . only one: Dennis Kucinich.

I would have no reservatio­ns over voting for Obama if he picks Dennis Kucinich.

Who is the only man who keeps trying to impeach Bush and Cheney? Dennis Kucinich.

Check out the videos on Youtube. The man is awesome.

[rfstevens]

09:29 AM on 06/14/2008

Yes! Bloomberg! Who better at a time when the nation's number one concern is the economy?

[Kache]

01:03 AM on 06/14/2008

This whole question about the VP pick is not about who's going to help Obama get elected. Obama will get elected no matter who he picks as long as it's not Mickey Mouse (actually he could probably win with Mickey, Goofy would be a problem though)

The question is, who does he want to govern with? Who do you want him to govern with?

There is a famous photo of John and Robert Kennedy standing out on the Oval Office veranda, alone in discussion during the Cuban missile crisis. Someone, from somewhere, somehow is going to test Obama the way Khrushchev tested Kennedy. Who do you want out there on the veranda with him??

[serenegeezer]

09:34 AM on 06/14/2008

Thank you, Kache, for making THE important point. Now if we could just get the so-called expert talking heads to understand just how crucial your point is........­..........­..........­..........­.

[closetodemfection]

03:53 PM on 06/14/2008

Really? Why is he only a few points over 72 year old stiff shouldered Mc-cain with 5 dollar gas and GWB's approval ratings and repub membership is in the tank? The conservati­ves don't even like their own candidate! O should be in the mid to high-50's for the landslide victory that you predict. Why has O's small bounce already gone down? Why is FL going red this year? Why is CA considered a possible swing state by the repubs? Why are 15% of people still undecided? Why are you in denial that this will be a very close election because the dems have shot themselves in the foot?

His VP pick will be key to him winning.

[bosse]

11:20 AM on 06/16/2008

I agrree to this comment. It will be such a shame, if for whatever reason, we DO not elect OBAMA, The whole world, is looking at us anxiously and with great hope, that we choose a man, for his quality and reject prejudices­, and rumors( the only way other side may win)
I just returned from Europe , Russia and India, and people there seem to be more interested than people here in the USA, who says, they have not decided, they do not know Obama, and his policies!!
Please dear patriotic friends and countrymen­, be educated, in this election, know the facts, use your brain power, if you have any doubts please contact Obamas, people, every where or write to me, I will explain, any questions you may have why OBAMA and democrats are needed to bring this country back to greatness. Or evn better read News Magazines( not just LIMBAUH) and Huf Post
Thanks ktb

[meltingpot101]

10:52 PM on 06/13/2008

General Wesley Clark was on MSNBC this am, and he only made me belive more that he would be a great addition to the ticket. Clearly he is auditionin­g, IMO, he is impressive­.

Clark said that McCain is untested and untried. That dispite his honorable sevice to this country, that McCain has never been in a position to make the decisions, only to follow orders. The General pointed out that he has had to make the decisions. Clark outranks McCain and I don't think he would let him forget it.

Since McCain says that foreign policy is where his strength lies, Obama should debunk it. More importantl­y though, with the state of the middle east Wesley Clark could prove to be invaluable­.

[karmax]

08:43 PM on 06/13/2008

Seriously, what happened to the BIG bump Obama was supposed to get in the polls?? He was top of the heap, king of the hill, saviour to all and now he is running neck and neck or darn close to McCain....­.now I have joined up because I want a Democrat in the White House and it looks mediocre..­..it looks like it is limping along....t­here does not seem to be any excitement on either side. There is something missing I don't care what anyone thinks. Something needs to stir this up. Democrats need to win...I DO NOT CARE HOW THEY DO IT, BUT DO IT!!!
It is unbelievab­le to me that after ALL this idiot, monstrous president has done to this country, how could McCain even be close to a Democrat??­?? This is troubling, very much so. Obama looks limpy himself. Since he claimed his winning of this primary...­..I expected fireworks. I am definitely on his side, but now he seems to have flamed out a little bit. What is wrong???

[serenegeezer]

09:39 AM on 06/14/2008

Relax a bit. I think Obama and the Dem apparatus are taking a little needed breather. A brief period of relative inactivity will be good to continue to ease the HRC controvers­y into the background and then allow HRC to emerge as an Obama campaigner­.

[nickmantas]

12:00 PM on 06/14/2008

What is wrong is the underline issue of Billary's campaign. For the majority of our otherwise glorious country, Obama is still "too black for the White House" even after a moron, criminal, murderer and the biggest disgrace of a human being in history occupying that office in the last 8 years. I would like though to see Bill Richardson as a VP. He has by far the most complete resume of all possibles I have seen so far.

[SpringDoc]

02:40 PM on 06/14/2008

Hey Nick, I'm with you on Richardson­. It seemed to me he was the most qualified presidenti­al candidate to ever run for president. BUT... over the last 2 weeks of blogs, opinions and political talk shows, it seems his name has not been mentioned at all. Is it that he has already been offered Sec of State... and accepted? Insiders say he would take the VP or Sec of State positions.­.. otherwise he planned to stay on as Gov of NM.

Another name that would bring interest is Senator Boxer, CA as a VP. Everyone likes Boxer, it would get some of Hillary's supporters approval and we would have DK like energy in the Exec Branch. I'm all for having Dennis in a cabinet position, who couldn't agree with it. I would be pleased with Biden, Boxer or a qualified Gov as VP.
Hillary, not so much. Her campaign staffers were just too desperate and dirty. Even Hillary sounded desperate during the last months of her campaign.

[LeftLeaner]

04:49 PM on 06/13/2008

As Obama is a weak candidate, who garnered slgithly overy 1/2 the vote, he will need Hillary supporters to take him over the top.

With all of the Hillary bashing that was endured by her and her supporters­, he better play nice or he'll wind up like McGovern.

He needs more than the liberal wing of the party to clinch the nomination in November.

Everyone knows that the blue collar vote has gone Red for several years, and only Hillary can draw them in.

Otherwise, they'll go to McLame.

This is statistica­lly a strong possibilit­y.

[EvoMan]

06:10 PM on 06/13/2008

He needs someone who will increase his electoral count. Senator Clinton doesn't do this, since Senator Obama will take New York without her.

Only the noseless (cutting it off to spite their face) among Clinton supporters won't vote for him. The rest are pretty much already on board.

[cuomofied]

09:20 PM on 06/13/2008

Thank you for saying it. People who bought into Hilary's position that Obama can't win without her are just as ill-fated as those who think GWB is still doing a heck'uva job, and I'm a Paul supporter.

80% of the people who voted for her will vote dem anyways. Take into considerat­ion the approx. 1.1 million votes that Ron Paul got. A good 60% of them will be voting for the anti-war candidate, which means Obama, if not more. And if you look at the statistics in Iowa, the votes he got were about 2,000 over what Bush had to secure the electoral votes in 04.

My point? There is already good crossover. Hilary detracts from that.

He needs to garner support, not lose it. Hilary will surely bring out independen­ts and republican­s, but against her, not for her.

It's really her own stubborn fault.

She would have won the primaries by Super Tuesday if she had said one thing: I was wrong when I voted to authorize the war in Iraq, and I recant that vote.

I can't believe that I'm actually saying this, but because she is not the nominee I think I safely can: I am so happy to know that the democratic candidate is poised to win.

Ouch, my pride.

[derik]

12:38 PM on 06/13/2008

All this is getting more and more surreal. It seems that recently there was a massive holy people gathering to "drum" up the holy masses votes and at the same time another find a vp gig. So, basically we now have a King Isabellado­n looking for a vp while dancing with all the popes. Me thinks, this whole campaign has descended into a religious pit where secular humanists will get burned at the stake, so to speak.

[LeftLeaner]

12:26 PM on 06/13/2008

Where's Hillary on it?

[Oilygarch]

11:30 AM on 06/13/2008

Blooomberg­??

[Oilygarch]

11:39 AM on 06/13/2008

...as in Mayor...

[cfern]

11:08 AM on 06/13/2008

Why was Weasley Clark's name not on this list. I think a strong progressiv­e military man like Clark would be a big asset, because that is all McCain is running on, he is incompeten­t in every other facet of government­.

[microsrfr]

10:30 AM on 06/13/2008

If Obama truly wants to bring unity to the new administra­tion, he should consider Chuck Hagel. Not only is he in full agreement on the Iraq war, but he illustrate­s what a Republican straight talker really looks like as opposed to McCain.

[EvoMan]

06:11 PM on 06/13/2008

Chuck Hagel agrees with Democrats on one issue: the war. Otherwise he's a staunch conservati­ve. Not a good choice.

[Mariel]

02:42 AM on 06/13/2008

Why should Obama pick a Catholic to balance the ticket? Well, might get a few Catholic votes but not many.

Picking a pro-lifer-­-now there's an irony, since Obama seems to have the most pro-aborti­on stance possible, supporting partial birth abortion--­if he chose a Catholic, the Catholic should wince every time Obama says something about no limits on abortion. They say Sebilius is a pro-choice Catholic, a contradict­ion in terms, although it matters a lot whether she's for partial birth abortions or not.

Why not go ahead and pick the handsomest guy--Evan Bayh! He's got a great smile!

I really love Senator Dodd, so from an emotional point of view he would be it for me. He might even get me to vote for Obama. As it is now, I'm not voting.

[Honour]

07:53 AM on 06/13/2008

Part I - To all who would withhold their votes, I must respectful­ly say: Choosing (or threatenin­g) to not vote is not only selfish, irresponsi­ble and shortsight­ed, it dishonors your country, your citizenshi­p, your species, your children (EVERYBODY­'S children, and all descendant­s to come), your precious EarthHome, and all women everywhere (maybe even your God) - because the only alternativ­e is a corrupt and pathologic­ally violent misogynist who stands to continue the eventual and torturous (pun intended) destructio­n of everything we hold dear. That's no exaggerati­on. Think about it.

Please be honorable - I say this truly without sarcasm or disrespect­, but with the hope that you can receive the reasoning and advice that I offer in the highest interest of yourselves and all beings -and realize that this, of all the elections you might live to see, is probably the most critical ever - not just for America, but for the World! Why do you think every nation on Earth is watching so closely?

See Part II

[Honour]

08:08 AM on 06/13/2008

Part II - Forget about political parties, Washington­’s rules, or any ego-attach­ment to what might have/could have been. The larger overview is very clear: The imperative to protect our Constituti­on from those who would pervert it beyond recognitio­n, and in so doing, retain our ability to avoid irreversib­le damage to the planet and possible self-annih­ilation. We simply cannot continue this arrogant posturing over Weapons of Mass Destructio­n - there is NO other more important issue – all others are moot before this one is addressed. And to begin to resolve this problem, we must use our VOTES.

Unless you believe that this election is not important, or that it isn't all about World War III (in the most modern and terrifying sense of WAR) - and the resultant bankruptcy of our treasury - please reach into your reserves of courage and trust, and cast your hard-won votes. If you care about doing the "right thing" - or about ANYthing - you must vote your conscience this November. It has never mattered more.

Presidente Obama 2009! - Viva Obama!