Under grilling this morning by Tom Brokaw on Meet the Press today, Barack Obama refused to play coy on any potential pick for the vice presidential slot on the Democratic ticket, offering only this clue: he wants someone with whom he can govern, he said, and someone who brings to the table strengths he may not have. While the CW types see in that caveat names like Biden and Bayh, Obama's main criterion leaves plenty of wiggle room.
Word comes today that the Obama campaign is floating the name of Ann Veneman, the Bush administration's *first* [update] agriculture secretary, a rather baffling idea, especially if you read Rick Perlstein's take-down at the Campaign for America's Future site. Is this some kind of ploy to engage female swing voters a bit earlier in the process than they would ordinarily tune in?
So, what about Hillary Clinton? Brokaw brought up an account by Clinton fundraiser Jill Iscol of a conversation she had with Barack Obama, in which Iscol said Obama's problem with Hillary was her husband. Pressed by Brokaw, Obama said he would welcome having Bill Clinton out on the stump for him, every day, as the interviewer phrased it, Obama noted how the former prez campaigned to great effect in "small, rural towns" across the country while Sen. Clinton worked the big towns "as hard as she did." In other words, would love, love to have Bill out of sight organizing the "hardworking white people" while the candidate continues to soak up the spotlight. A great strategy, actually, but I'm not so sure how well it will be received in Clintonia.
Answering another question, Obama seemed to reveal an evolving strategy for how do deal with the very issue that makes this presidential election so historic -- that of Obama's race. Confronted by very lopsided poll numbers favoring McCain in measuring the public's perception of the two presidential contenders as commander-in-chief, Obama gave an answer that surprised me: "I don't look like previous commanders-in-chief," he said.
I can't tell you how many times I've found myself shouting at the television when pundits cluelessly wonder aloud why, in light of all of McCain's gaffes, self-contradictions, Keating 5 baggage, health problems and notorious temper, Obama isn't fairing better in polls against McCain.
"Because he's black," I yell.
Hello?
BACKGROUND FOR THIS POST:
Here's how the L.A. Times's Peter Nicholas reported on July 12 the news of Iscol's conversation with Obama:
Obama replied that [Hillary Clinton] is on his list, Iscol recounted, and that it would be a mistake not to have her on such a list. But he also explained that he was thinking through a potential "complication" -- Bill Clinton."He said once you're a president, even if you're a former president, you're always a president," Iscol said.
Last week, HuffPost's own Seth Colter Walls reported that Iscol would object to any woman other than Hillary Clinton being named to the ticket. Not exactly what I'd call feminism.
Follow Adele Stan on Twitter: www.twitter.com/addiestan
Yeah, it's about race!
NOT Hillary Clinton, for any reason. After what she did to Obama in the campaign. ('Tearing his face off', was one respected woman journalist's way of putting it.)
If Anne Veneman is suggested I do not have faith that he will pick someone great. Preferably he needs a woman, someone who is respected, experienced. Next to that, he needs a man who is someone who is respected and experienced. Either need to be someone whom we can trust and who has values we can respect -- that is, fairness to all, respect for women's needs, respect for people of color and for poor people. Not a precious rich guy who has been living in an ivory tower for decades.
So they aren't committing.
Either the Quinnipiac poll in CA was way off (Obama plus 24 points) or Rasmussen is now way off (Obama plus 10 points). A downward shift of that magnitude in a blue state is very odd.
I'm kind of sick of people posting on polling numbers without providing CONTEXT.
That's why it was okay to say black people who clearly were voting based on politics were actually voting based on race, and why it's okay to assume that any black person saying they would vote for Obama because he came from the same economic background, with the same sort of experiences in his history, is really saying they'll vote for him because he's black.
Painting the tale that way makes white people feel superior, let's them say to themselves: "see, MY race would never be so shallow as these stupid n-words". By admitting that more than half of their race, in fact, IS voting purely based on skincolor and ridiculous suspicions thoroughly discredited, they would have to acknowledge that they really aren't innately superior after all.
Too bad the so-called feminists insisting they wouldn't accept any female VP other than Hillary haven't yet caught on to the fact that voting or not voting solely because of gender--especially just because a certain female isn't being advanced--is what real feminists fight AGAINST.
Lots of Obamaians cite reasons to not include HRC as VP. I disagree. 17.3 million voters cast their ballot to give her the chance to be president. She has proved herself as more than capable. With her fully on his side, she would be a formidible ally, and they an unbeatable historic team.
If this isn't our focus, then our priorities have become muddled somehow. Maybe a day on the fireline, a day helping out in a homeless shelter, or a day in 140 Degree F heat in a flakjacket would help return us to reality.
How could Hillary not be on the list after the millions of supporters are counted?
Gimme an I
Gimme an L
Gimme an L
Gimme a list of the donors to your presidential library so that it doesn't become an issue the rest of the GE, as has been mentioned many times before.
I don't. Thank goodness it's just a phony short list.
I'm hoping he'll pick Edwards. *beg*
"Because he's black," I yell. "
How interesting. What I yell is "Because they aren't surveying cell phone users or newly registered voters!"
A 'survey of likely voters' means people who voted in 2004 (and sometimes 2000 and 2004.) There have already been record numbers of newly registered democratic voters this year:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/04/27/ST2008042702368.html
And people who have cellphones but not landlines are more likely to be in Obama's demographic, not McCain's:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2008/07/14/cell_phone/
It isn't about race. It is about insufficient polling methods.
I wouldn't worry too much, though. He can pick any vp he likes, male or female, as long as its not Hillary, and he'll win the election in a walk.