Category: Election 2008 – Presidential

I am a frequent message board reader, and someone posed the question of who Obama’s VP would be. I believe it would be Tom Daschle. I got the following responses.

Failure. Weakling. No.

Was defeated for reelection in 2004, from a small state in the Northwest, carries the odor of failure. Don’t see it happening.

So I responded with the following, which some people may find interesting.

Why was he defeated in 2004? Because South Dakota thought he went Washington. What does Obama need? Someone with Washingtonian experience. Reagan had Bush. Clinton had Gore. Bush had Cheney. Obama needs a Cheney.

Who is Obama’s Senate Chief of Staff? Pete Rouse . Daschle’s former (critical) aide.

Daschle also made a few trips to Iowa in ’05 and ’06, but likely had no intention of running. Could he have been just scoping things for Obama while Edwards and Hillary were clearly running presidential campaigns? Perhaps.

When did Tom Daschle endorse Obama? Almost immediately. Can anyone name a bigger endorsement earlier?

Who happened to make some of the tag line quotes against Clinton from the Obama camp this week. Daschle once more.

There has been a long time anti-Clinton sentiment amongst many Democrats in Washington. Bill always looked out for number one, and with that, there were a number of groups that coalesced opposed the DLC/Clinton ways. Mr. Daschle was one of them, and he definitely has his finger in the presidential race pot.

He gives Obama the “insider” Washington experience that a McCain could criticize him on. And honestly, people don’t care if Change and Hope meet the VP spot. Would anyone ever call Cheney a compassionate conservative?

Also, I would like to toot my own horn a little bit and bring this back up.
From my January 8th post.

I do not think Obama is JFK. However the point I want to make is that I think Bill’s greatest political battle will be taking down his hero to an extent. In 1960, Nixon was more experienced to become president, but JFK riled up a new generation of politicos, including Bill Clinton. Bill Clinton is the best tactician in politics, but will his abilities be enough to take down the inspiring candidate? I just found the JFK – Clinton – Obama connection interesting.

NY Times: A President Like My Father

Instead of finishing my last application to grad school, I sat for hours watching New Hampshire primary results come in. I admit I support Obama. I came to this decision before Iowa, but in honesty it is due to a lesser of evils sort of thing.

The thought that struck me tonight was how interesting this race is. Bill Clinton is probably the best politician that the Democrats have. It is to the point of indescribable about how good he is. Within his own presidency, he was able to overcome a failed health care plan, a government shutdown, and impeachment while leaving office with a 60+ approval rating. Simply remarkable.

Everyone knows that the topic since Iowa has been “change.” And to many it seems that Hillary has altered her message to emphasize her ability as a change agent. She did. He didn’t. About a month ago, Bill was using the change agent talking point. Hillary at this point had just slipped a little to Obama in the polls, but was still up in most in New Hampshire. Hillary tried to make herself appear softer and more “likable.” And Bill was saying she is a change agent….The topic of change has become so dominant that even John McCain on Sunday was trying to argue he was an agent of change. Bill saw this theme a month in advance.

Then there is Obama. The man who can inspire, and I am not saying this lightly either. The ability to move people with words is quite a feat. He actually is bring people into the political arena that have been absent their whole lives. Even when conceding, he gave the strongest speech of the night. He is a great orator, but his Harvard Law Review credentials assure there is more in him than great vocal cords. He may be the most inspiring candidate the Democrats have had since Kennedy. Bill’s words always fit just right, but they rarely moved an individual. I don’t think I need to argue much about Kerry, Gore, Dukakis, Mondale, Carter, or McGovern.

I do not think Obama is JFK. However the point I want to make is that I think Bill’s greatest political battle will be taking down his hero to an extent. In 1960, Nixon was more experienced to become president, but JFK riled up a new generation of politicos, including Bill Clinton. Bill Clinton is the best tactician in politics, but will his abilities be enough to take down the inspiring candidate? I just found the JFK – Clinton – Obama connection interesting.
* * *
In my personal analysis, I think Hillary is on a better track now, and at the same time Obama is finding an even better message.

Hillary on Saturday made points pretty much saying she is battle tested, which is the greatest attribute she has over Obama. We know little to anything about this State Senator from Illinois. Hillary, we know she will get 47-50% of the vote, and we know every attack that will come at her. The Clintons will follow the rule of field operatives: Get 50% + 1 to win. Political experience is not Hillary’s strength. Her assets are that she has face the Republican Machine time and time again and is now a viable candidate for President.

The message that sounds beautiful from Obama is his “New Majority.” In a time of red state and blue states, and two elections that were decided by about a percent in 2000 and 2004, a New Majority has a great ring. Obama knows his appeal is beyond the Democratic base, and Hillary could never argue that she can have 60% of the nation vote for her. The people know who she is, and they like or they don’t. There is little unknown. But in this election of “change,” Obama owns the issue (sorry Edwards). He is the change and hope candidate, and his New Majority could put a temporary stay on the era of the focus group, talking point, and spin. All of this is very idealistic, but when was the last time a candidate of this magnitude offered generic platitudes of hope, change, sugar plums, and cotton candy dreams and everyone soaked it up?

It is a battle between the unknown and inspiring verse the known but political guru.

Makes for great television.

Of the candidates in the race, Newt is probably one of the smartest politicians. He hasn’t hopped in the race, but by not doing so, he gets more media coverage. Maybe I am underestimating his name recognition from the 90s, but on both sides there seem to be the big three. Then Gore as the unknown Democrat, and Gingrich as the unknown Republican (admittedly there is a little competition from Thompson for that spot, but not on the national scene yet).

Just my random thought as I have one of my mornings where I wake up early after drinking, so take that for what it is worth.