<p>Obama cannot pick any of the Democratic Senators who voted for the war and the list of those who voted against is very limited. He also needs to pick someone who will help reach out to the South, Reagan Democrats, and cultural conservatives. His only logical pick is Senator Jim Webb of Virginia. Webb is consistent with Obama on Iraq yet brings experience as Reagan’s Navy Secretary.</p>
<p>Alright, I think we can all agree on one thing. </p>
<p>Obama’s running mate will 100% be a white, Christian, male.</p>
<p>Prejudiced voters may be able to handle having one “unconventional” on the ballot, but the moment it looks like blacks, minorities, women, muslims, ect. are taking over the government…</p>
<p>Its all about the politics. I also predict they will be older, from the south, and more moderate and up on foreign policy.</p>
<p>EDWARDS EDWARDS EDWARDS EDWARDS EDWARDS EDWARDS</p>
<pre><code> or
</code></pre>
<p>BIDEN</p>
<p>(Better for the experience quotient, but it’s just that it’s 2 Northerners on the ticket. Other people mentioned are mostly unknowns to the American public.)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Probably. </p>
<p>And if the ticket succeeds, some lunatic will try to bump Obama off in order to install the “more acceptable” figure as President.</p>
<p>epiphany-Edwards voted for the war. I think Biden did too. They are tainted goods. No one looking for change would vote for them and Obama would look foolish taking them. Obama cannot take on the baggage of anyone who was against the war. Hillary’s vote for the war kills her chances too. The challenge for Obama is to pick someone consistent with him on foreign policy who also will bring in some votes. His list is remarkably short because of this.</p>
<p>Obama and Edwards are both one-term Senators. I think Obama needs someone with some age, some name recognition, some long-term political credibility, and some foreign policy credentials to balance the public’s perceptions about his youth and recent emergence. I second Sam Nunn, who would also be the more impressive and accomplished senior citizen when AAPR magazine profiles both him and McCain.</p>
<p>. . . sorry, that’s AARP (way to blow a punch line.)</p>
<p>Obama/Biden sounds better. (More mellifluous);)</p>
<p>Biden’s also more currently in the public eye, also can therefore bring in more party regulars than Nunn can.</p>
<p>Looks like Clinton is a long shot for more reasons than mentioned previously.</p>
<p>[RealClearPolitics</a> - Articles - Michelle Vetoes Hillary](<a href=“http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/05/michelle_vetoes_hillary.html]RealClearPolitics”>RealClearPolitics - Articles - Michelle Vetoes Hillary)</p>
<p>Damn, that Edwards is cute. Way too cute.</p>
<p>Biden’s like 3 yrs younger than Nunn, and more dynamic, more engaging. Yes, one has to look at balance, but you don’t want the bottom of the ticket to cancel out the top, but rather to provide some harmony in there, too. I don’t think Nunn with Obama “works,” but who’s to tell? It’s early yet.</p>
<p>Obama-Nunn—now that sounds like a charismatic ticket…</p>
<p>NOT!</p>
<p>There is a lot going for Jim Webb, except that he hasn’t endorsed Obama…yet.</p>
<p>And it’s not REQUIRED for the top of the ticket to select a boring mate. What’s wrong with a Dynamic Duo?</p>
<p>Re: Biden - why would he want someone who not only supported the Iraq War, but supported war with Iraq as early as 1998?</p>
<p>Sounds like “canceling out the ticket” to me.</p>
<p>Bill seems to have lost his abilities - I refer to his performance in the primaries while supporting his wife. Scuffling with a reporter in PA, putting a ridiculous spin on the Bosnia lie, the Jesse Jackson comment after SC.</p>
<p>momofnewP,</p>
<p>Be easy on Bill. He may indeed have lost some of his abilities! In September 2004, he underwent a four-hour quadruple cardiac bypass surgery. There is evidence that some individuals who undergo cardiac bypass surgery develop lasting cognitive impairment. Could this be why he appears off his game and a little loopy at times out there on the campaign trail?</p>
<p>[NEJM</a> – Longitudinal Assessment of Neurocognitive Function after Coronary-Artery Bypass Surgery](<a href=“http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/344/6/395]NEJM”>http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/344/6/395)</p>
<p>FarmDad - could be any of those reasons. The campaign perhaps should have better assessed his possibly diminished capabilities and put him in a less visible position earlier. They seemed to do this in N Carolina. No press, no question and answer session. </p>
<p>He often seems to be wagging his finger about. To me looks silly. Just my opinion.</p>
<p>Farm I also wonder sometimes if being under anesthesia for any type of surgery for a prolonged period of time creates some cognitive changes.</p>
<p>I believe that the risk for anesthetic related post-operative changes is higher for those with pre-operative risk factors(e.g., age, prior cognitive impairment), but my understanding is that the problems that can occur following coronory-artery bypass surgery have less to do with the anesthesia and more to do with the release of air emboli material to the brain when the blood vessels are clamped and circulation is being controlled by a pump rather than the heart. Some anesthesiologists call it “pump-head syndrome.” There are some ways of mitigating this during the surgery, and I assume that all would be availed to a former president, but who knows?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Or maybe he’s just “lost his bearings”—LOL!</p>
<p>I agree with the Ed Rendell suggestion. He would bring Pennsylvania for sure, and probably Ohio as well – that blue-collar, white voter pool Hillary says Obama can’t win. He’s also very likeable.</p>