It's Biden!

In case anybody hasn't seen (and if that's the case, then you need to get out more), Obama will apparently name Senator Joseph Biden (D-DE) later today (link here). In my mind this is a good pick, but, as with all people, it's a two-sided coin.

Pros:

• Biden was elected to the Senate in 1972 (at the age of 29), which brings a lot of experience to counter McCain's argument that Obama is naive and unexperienced.
  
• He is chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which counters the argument that the Obama campaign lacks foreign policy knowledge and depth.
• Born into a working-class Catholic family, Biden has always stayed true to his blue-collar roots, and has constantly been ranked one of the poorest senators (and yes, he only has one house).
  
• In 1972, shortly after he was elected to the Senate, his wife and infant daughter died in a car crash; to ensure that he would always stay close with his family, Biden made it a practice to commute from Washington, DC to his house in Wilmington, DE every night, a tradition that he still continues.
• Biden is a quick wit, and will be a formidable attack dog, both in the debates and on the campaign trail.

Cons:

• He tends to run his mouth, leading to boring, drawn-out answers to questions that could be answered in a sentence or two.
• Similarly, Biden has committed a series of high-profile gaffes in his career, including: accidentally plagiarizing UK Labour leader Neil Kinnock during his first presidential run in 1988; saying, on the topic of Indian-American relations, "You cannot go to a 7-11 or Dunkin Donuts unless you have a slight Indian Accent;" and, on Obama's run for the Presidency, "I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy, I mean, that's a storybook, man."
• He doesn't add much geographically, nor does he reinforce the "change" image that the Obama campaign has worked so hard to perfect.
• He made some comments about Obama's lack of experience, while he was waging his own campaign for the Democratic nomination last year, that the Republicans have already started to use against him, such as "I think he can be ready, but right now I don't believe he is. The presidency is not something that lends itself to on-the-job training."

So those are all the pros and cons I can think of (granted it's 3am and I am quite tired). Later today Obama will formally introduce Biden at a rally at 1pm EST in Springfield, IL, where Obama launched his campaign a year and a half ago. Be sure to watch, it should be highly interesting.

Veepstakes: 8/15 (GOP)

Not to post four straight posts here, but I'm going to post four straight posts here. Yesterday we looked at the Democratic VP possibilities; today the Republicans!

10. Former Governor Mike Huckabee (R-AR) [Last: 9]
9. Congressman Eric Cantor (R-VA) [Last: N/A]
8. Governor Sarah Palin (R-AK) [Last: 5]
7. Former OMB Director Rob Portman (R-OH) [Last: 6]
6. Senator John Thune (R-SD) [Last: 8]

5. Governor Bobby Jindal (R-LA) [Last: 4]
Jindal's stock has dipped a bit over the last month, largely due to the McCain campaign's realization that Jindal is a) too conservative; b) too young; and c) too weird. Also, saying he is "staying as governor whether you like it or not" doesn't really leave much room for McCain to name him to the ticket. Still, nobody's stock was higher than his about a month ago, and the base does love him. But does McCain actually have base problems like we thought he would? For more on that, see picks 4 and 2.

4. Senator Joseph Lieberman (ID-CT) [Last: 10]
Ah, Senator Lieberman. Democrats hate him with a passion, Republicans love him. That in and of itself is surprising, considering Lieberman has a "Liberal rating" of 57.5, which puts him more to the left than six other members of his party. But Lieberman probably tilts even more right than that. Excepting the War in Iraq, Lieberman votes squarely with the Democrats on everything; yes, that includes the always popular issue of abortion. Lieberman is popular with the Republicans for the sole reason that he makes Democrats' heads explode. Would they like him on their ticket? Not likely. But everybody likes bipartisanship, and the story of McCain having Al Gore's VP nominee on his ticket would be a press coup. Lieberman's a masterful fighter dog, the running mate's primary occupation, but he seems more likely to assume a Zell Miller-esque role at the Republican Convention than be the VP nominee.

3. Former Governor Mitt Romney (R-MA) [Last: 1]
Romney's stock hasn't fallen, it's just faded. It's no secret that Romney and McCain don't like each other much, and the common wisdom at the beginning of the veepstakes was that it would take a miracle for Romney to be named to McCain's ticket. His negatives (flip-flopper, slick politician, Massachusetts roots) are glaring, while his positives (he's conservative?, he brings in money) are more questionable. Romney's main draw was always his fundraising prowess, something that the McCain ticket no longer needs so much of. And, while Huckabee might not be the VP, he and his base still have some say, so stories like this aren't so favorable to the Mittster's chances. But, as much as people may rant and bluster, Romney was good in the debates (especially when attacking the other candidates), and is able to effectively portray the role of a conservative, even if that's not really him. He, like Pawlenty, is a safe pick, but the safe qualities he embodies might not be needed anymore.

2. Former Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge (R-PA) [Last: N/A]
Ridge has it all. He was the popular governor of a swing state that the Democrats so desparately need to win; he was the first secretary of homeland security, which would beef up the McCain ticket's foreign policy credibility; and he has spent the past few years in business, which only highlight his already impressive economic knowledge. So why wasn't this guy named to the ticket months ago? The answer is very simple: he's pro-choice. When McCain floated the idea a few days ago that he would consider naming a pro-choice running mate, the religious right doesn't like (and see here) that concept much. There are plenty of adequate pro-life candidates, they say, so why name a pro-choice one? It is well known that, if McCain had his way, Ridge would be on his ticket. And he just might be, but he'd have to be prepared to deal with the fallout from the voters that elected (and re-elected) George W. Bush. Is it worth it?

1. Governor Tim Pawlenty (R-MN) [Last: 2]
Pawlenty's somewhat of a safe pick, which is why his name has kind of faded recently. While the Democratic buzz has been all about the boring guys (Bayh, Biden, Kaine), the GOP buzz has turned to the edgy picks of Ridge and Lieberman. But recent developments don't cancel out the fact that McCain and Pawlenty are good friends, and the recent statement by McCain that Republicans are "really going to like Pawlenty." The one problem with Pawlenty is that he doesn't really bring much geographically, although the GOP thinks he does. Contrary to their thinking, neither Minnesota, nor Iowa, nor Wisconsin are in play this November. Michigan might be, but it's hard to see how Pawlenty helps there (Romney's the guy if the aim is to win the Great Lakes State). Still, he's conservative, fairly popular, and wouldn't hurt the McCain ticket one bit. But one wonders if, in light of Obama's lead in the polls, it would help the McCain camp if they shook things up. Picking Pawlenty would certainly not do that.

A thought

This probably isn't anything, but I was musing around the Democratic National Convention's announced list of speakers (seen here) and noticed one very glaring exception: former Vice President Al Gore. Granted, the full slate of Thursday speakers hasn't been announced, and Josh rightly points out that Gore would be a prime person to introduce Obama, but it's still something to think over. You would assume that somebody who apparently is "likely to star at [the] convention" (c/o Reuters UK) would be one of the first announced, and most publicized, speakers.

Yet here we are, exactly two weeks before Obama is to accept the Democratic nomination, and one of the party's elder statesmen is not on the agenda. In 2004, former Georgia Senator Max Cleland introduced John Kerry. This appearance was announced at least 12 days before the start of the convention (see here). The start of this year's convention is but 11 days away, and an announcement has to be made soon.

If Gore is not slated for any of those Thursday spots, that would lead me, and probably many others, to the obvious conclusion here. It's unlikely, and has been denied by Gore himself before, but could an upset VP pick be in the making?

Veepstakes: 8/14 (Dems)

It's been a month since we took a look at the potential VP candidates on each side, and a lot has changed since then. John Edwards admitted to having an affair, Russia invaded Georgia, and the energy crisis turned into a GOP sideshow. To see what kind of an impact those events had on the veepstakes (Democratic today, Republican tomorrow), let's turn to the rankings:

10. Former Vice President Al Gore (D-TN) [Last: 10]
9. Senator John Kerry (D-MA) [Last: N/A]
8. Governor Bill Richardson (D-NM) [Last: N/A]
7. Former Senator Sam Nunn (D-GA) [Last: 8]
6. Governor Kathleen Sebelius (D-KS) [Last: 3]

5. Senator Jack Reed (D-RI) [Last: 7]
For the 99.9% of all Americans who haven't heard of Senator Jack Reed, he is a quite liberal senator from Rhode Island. Those last two qualifications alone would seem to dismiss any chance he has of landing on the backside of "Obama/," but think again. He served in the Army from 1971 to 1979, is one of the leading Senate voices on matters of both foreign and domestic importance, and, as a Catholic, has strong roots to the working class demographic that Obama has had trouble tapping into. He also accompanied Senator Obama on his highly publicized trip to the Middle East, for what was widely seen as Reed's VP audition. The fact that he doesn't immediately add any new state to the Obama column is certainly a drawback, but then againLyndon Johnson (1960) was the last VP pick to actually swing any state, so geography might be a tad overrated. Stay tuned, he could be a major sleeper pick.

4. Governor Tim Kaine (D-VA) [Last: 4]
Ever since his name came out as one of Obama's VP hopefuls, Governor Tim Kaine has played the veepstakes in a very odd way. Instead of dampening buzz, as per usual, Kaine has made no pretense that he's not interested in the job, stating "[Obama's VP list] seems to be getting shorter. And I'm still being mentioned." This has widely been seen as a headfake to get the mediat to run to Kaine, only to be completely be surprised by who Obama actually picks. But if he is seriously up for the job, his good looks, youth, and hailing from a swing state are pluses. His poor record as governor and rather moderate views on a number of key issues (labor relations, faith-based opposition to abortion), however, make him a risky pick.

3. Former General Wesley Clark (D-AR) [Last: N/A]
After Clark made some not-so-false (but oh so controversial) comments in early July, he went from veepstakes darling to somebody Obama shouldn't touch with a 10-foot pole. So it is with great surprise that, with an announcement from Obama seemingly less than a week away, Clark now resides near the top of this VP list. The first clue, which may even be too obvious, to Clark's ascension (not just here, but within actual political circles as well) is the fact that the DNC has announced that the theme for Wendesday of the Convention, the night the VP is announced, is "Securing America's Future;" three words which just happen to also be the name of Clark's political action committee. Although he's short on elected experience, and his only field of expertise is foreign affairs, Clark has proved his mettle as a more than capable attack dog. The recent Georgia crisis has just accentuated the need for foreign policy gravitas, and finally people are remembering why Clark was such an ideal pick in the first place.

2. Senator Evan Bayh (D-IN) [Last: 1]
After the much ado about nothing that was Obama's joint appearace with Senator Bayh on August 6th, and many false predictions about that event, moderate Evan Bayh of Indiana finds himself slipping a place in these rankings. It was widely seen that, if Obama was going to pick Bayh, that date last week was the time to do it. Since then, the Bayh speculation has surprisingly not dampened, but rather grew. There is word out now that Bayh's chances are "better than 50/50," but that should be taken with a grain of salt. A major backlash from the liberal blogosphere, combined with a rather biting New York Times article that does not paint Bayh in an all-too-positive light, seem to have excluded Bayh from serious consideration. Yet here we are in mid-August and he's still hanging tight. The #2 ranking might be more of a perception thing than what will actually happen, but Bayh is certainly not to be counted out.

1. Senator Joseph Biden (D-DE) [Last: 2]
It is surprising how little coverage Biden's VP chances are getting in the media, be it blogospheric or mainstream. After over thirty hugely respectable years in Washington, with two unsuccessful presidential campaigns under his belt, nobody knows the ropes more than Joe Biden. As chairman of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, Biden's authority on foreign policy matters is unquestioned, and his longtime chairmanship of the Judiciary Committee gives him serious knowledge of domestic issues. He's one of the most talented debaters and speakers around (see: Noun+Verb+9/11=Rudy Giuliani's sentences), and would absolutely serve as the aggressive attack dog that Obama would need him to. And unlike Bayh or Kaine, Biden is the one frontrunner with truly progressive views, so he would be palatable to both the base and independents alike. He's not a sure thing at this point, but he is certainly the frontrunner.