Posted on 07/01/2008 3:08:11 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
At a social gathering over the weekend, an assortment of political operatives, analysts and journalists engaged in Washington’s favorite parlor game: Declaring whom the presidential candidates ought to pick as running mates.
Among Democrats there were, predictably, those who wanted Sen. Barack Obama to put Sen. Hillary Clinton on his ticket. More surprising, as their discussion unfolded, a groundswell began to build for two less-conventional possibilities: Sen. Joseph Biden and Al Gore. (Yes, that would be the same Al Gore who held the job of vice president for eight years.)
The two men, different in many ways, have one important thing in common. Each would provide a kind of national-security blanket to cover the weakest spot on Sen. Obama’s résumé—his shortage of foreign-policy experience. As the interest in Messrs. Biden and Gore suggests, many Democrats fret about that weak spot, and are drawn to the idea of using the running-mate selection to address it.
The Obama campaign obviously has national security on its mind as the race with Sen. John McCain begins. That explains why Sen. Obama just announced he’ll be making an unusual campaign-season tour of Europe and the Middle East, including stops in Iraq and Afghanistan. Democrats can argue that the mess in Iraq and a deteriorating situation in Afghanistan raise questions about how much expertise the Republicans’ national-security experts have demonstrated, but worries about an experience gap persist.
Hence the question of whether the VP choice might help. The debate goes to the heart of the strategy behind picking a running mate: Should a nominee fill a narrow need, or a broad one?
It’s a big consideration. A compelling case can be made that if Mr. Gore, running for president in his own right in 2000, had only picked Sen. Bob Graham of Florida for the narrow purpose of helping win the Sunshine State, he would have been an undisputed victor in Florida, avoided the Supreme Court debate about hanging chads, and would be president today.
Meanwhile, President George W. Bush succeeded by going broad with his vice-presidential selection that year, picking Dick Cheney. Mr. Cheney delivered nothing in electoral-map terms—his home state of Wyoming would have gone Republican if Mr. Bush had left the vice-presidential line blank—but his image as a man of great experience nicely complemented Mr. Bush’s sparse national and international experience.
Yes, the Cheney selection told voters, there would be adult leadership in a Bush White House. While Mr. Cheney has evolved into one of the most controversial vice presidents in recent times, the choice achieved its goals in 2000.
Now Sen. Obama faces the same strategic choice. Pick a prominent governor—such as Ted Strickland of Ohio or Ed Rendell of Pennsylvania—to secure a swing state? Or fill a broader need on national security?
On the latter count, Sen. Biden’s appeal is clear. In a 35-year Senate career representing Delaware, he has devoted big chunks of time and energy to foreign affairs, developing genuine expertise and rising to become chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
He has evolved from predictably left-of-center—he won his seat initially with a dovish stance on Vietnam—to become a centrist who often works across party lines. He has favored negotiations with Iran and North Korea, but was hawkish on Bosnia and supported the resolution that authorized the attack on Iraq, after failing to secure a competing version more to his liking.
Sen. Biden has worked outside the box. He has pushed a plan to deal with the mess in Iraq by essentially dividing the country into three semi-autonomous regions, for Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds. The plan’s merits are open to debate, but pushing it required a fair degree of self-assurance. Self-confidence, in fact, isn’t something Sen. Biden lacks; he’s run for president himself, twice.
Mr. Gore would be a more startling choice. Since his own unsuccessful run for the presidency, of course, Mr. Gore has become a kind of international rock star on the subject of climate change. Picking a man who isn’t just a former vice president, but also the recipient of a Nobel Peace Prize, would be audacious.
But there’s no doubt that Mr. Gore knows the world, and the world knows him. In a year of maximum opportunity for their party, some Democrats think Obama-Gore would be the optimum ticket.
The idea raises some sticky questions. First is whether there is any chance Mr. Gore would even be interested. If he were, would he overshadow the nominee? How would all those working-class voters in the industrial Midwestern states, already a problem for Sen. Obama, react to what Republicans would surely call Mr. Gore’s industry-strangling ideas on global warming? Similarly, of course, not everybody would be thrilled with Sen. Biden, who has run for president twice without success. He has a reputation for being verbose. And, in a new memoir, longtime party fixture Ted Sorensen excoriates him for undercutting Mr. Sorensen’s nomination to become director of central intelligence in the 1970s.
Still, Democrats’ options for a running mate with genuine national-security expertise are limited. One might be Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island, a West Point graduate and former Army paratrooper who voted against the Iraq war authorization. Another would be New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, a former United Nations ambassador, though some worry that combining the first African-American presidential nominee with the first Hispanic vice-presidential nominee might be a bridge too far. Hence, the rising of the names Biden and Gore.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
Yes, just what he needs. A bunko artist.
That is whats known to Democrats as GRAVITAS,....I guess, if thats what they think the Loon from Tennessee brings
Two arrogant Ivy League elitists! Brilliant!
(Oops, sorry, three. Forgot Michelle.)
And by the way, after the Elian Gonzales raid (considering how tight the race was) Al could have picked Mickey Mouse and not won Florida.
I hope it is Biden. He says something stupid everytime he opens his mouth.
Why are they threatening OBambi?
What has he attempted to do on his own against his masters wishes to bring this threat upon himself.
Aw, you mean elites, leave the OBambi alone. His mother died when he was so young. Give him a break.
I appreciate your concern about former Vice President Gore taking up the position again, but he is my relative, and I object to the barrage of insult. Yes, his policies are wrong, but he’s not a stupid man in many ways.
Gore or Biden? The Sominex twins.
They know deep in the seldom-used area of their brains that another wing-nut on the ticket will guarantee defeat... and that a(ugh...) hawkish white man could solve Osama's “problem”. But as in the past, their emotion overrides plain, common sense. Just the fact that they're turning over every rock to find the “perfect solution” shows that Osama needs help.
IMO, Webb... even Bayh would strengthen the ticket. A female replacement for The Beast wouldn't... neither would El Guapo Richardson. Forget Gore, Edwards, Biden and the rest of the “usual suspects”.
You know what? At the Denver convention, somehow their places will be swapped and it’ll be Gore/Obama 2008...
Is Carter eligible to run for Veep?
Obama may be, Gore is not.
Sure is.
You may be right. I have always thought that Gore would ride in on his white ass (that’s as in “donkey,” heh!) to save the party.
I’m not sure that Obama is going to let it go, though. Hillary underestimated both Obama’s desire for power and the extent to which the extremist fringe had become the controlling element in the Dem party. Gore is in good with the fringe and that wouldn’t be a problem to him, but I think even he would have a heck of a time tearing it away from Obama.
But anything could happen at the convention, I guess. Some of Obama’s supporters might riot, but a lot of the others - environmental nuts, internationalists, etc. - would probably be satisfied with Gore.
But... but... wouldn't Obama be taking a horrible risk, what with our "bad" intel, and the inability- complete FAILURE- to provide any kind of reliable security in those regions? OR, wouldn't such a "tour" be proof that Democrats are full of crap, that security in these regions is dependable, that the risk to Obama -the Messiah of the Democrat party- (and as this tour is implying -the entire world!) of being hurt or killed by out of control terrorism, is miminal or non- existent?
Enough. Gore doesn’t want to be VP. If he wanted the Presidential nomination in 04 or this year it was his.
If the tail were smarter, it would wag the dog.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.