02 March 2008

Election Speculation

Had lunch with friends today. Some interesting election-related topics came up...

Quasi-unanimity for Obama
First, 6 out of 7 are backing Obama. The remaining one is on the fence but leaning Obamawards. Demographically, all are college-educated white collar professionals living in Cincinnati or NYC. Ages ranged from early 30s to 70s. Only one identified herself as "liberal." Two had a solid history of voting Republican until GWBush, and the remaining four had independent patterns.

Also interesting were opinions on Clinton. All except the one on the fence disliked her personality, especially during the debates. The self-identified liberal said she "didn't trust" Clinton. Furthermore, no one seemed to buy into the "experience" argument. The basic view was that Clinton did not have much more experience that Obama, just a few more years in the Senate.

The VP Issue
To me, the VP issue is more intriguing than the race. Who would the candidates pick? One of the NYC friends alluded to Bloomberg's recent op-ed in which he promised to do whatever possible to help elect the candidate who can bring the country together. Is he positioning himself as a VP, my friend wondered?

And things can get even more festive... if Clinton wins the nomination, what if Obama ran as an independent? What if he picked Bloomberg as running mate?

What if independent Obama picked a woman... say, Kathleen Sibelius? How many votes would that take away from Clinton?

My sister in D.C. thinks that Bill Richardson will be the running mate regardless of the nominee. Has anyone else heard that?

I think it's fair to assume that Ted Strickland would be high on Clinton's list. He might be on Obama's too, who knows? What about Virginia's Mark Warner? What about Iowa's Tom Vilsack?

As far as McCain, several possibilities have been tossed around but I haven't heard the name of former Colorado Governor Bill Owens. I think he'd be a good choice, Republican-wise. I presume McCain will feel pressure to pick someone to placate the party's corporate and evangelical extremists, and Owens can do that. But he's also someone who can legitimately do the job, unlike our current President.

I understand Dan Quayle is also available.

3 comments:

E Goods said...

I think former Senator Bob Kerrey (NE) is high on the list (especially Clinton's). His only drawback is his last name is Kerr(e)y.

Dems will probably go with someone with foreign policy "experience". Wesley Clark comes to mind.

I think the Republicans will try to add some diversity to their ticket through the VP but also try to appease conversative. Im thinking Condi Rice is at the top of the list but i doubt she wants it.

Kate The Great said...

I have heard the Wesley and Strickland where Clinton is concerned, and also the Sebelius speculation for Obama.

I have my pick for tomorrow... but I'll back whomever the Democratic party props up for November - because it's time for change.

Wes said...

Remember, WestEnder - for the hardcore types in the GOP, inability to run a government is a feature, not a bug. They want to prove government doesn't work (and if the past seven years have proven anything, in their hands it doesn't).

WF