Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Aug 12, 2008 21:01:15 GMT -5
If Obama picks Kaine, I'll happily bet anyone that it doesn't deliver Virginia for him.
iPhones are so cool, I think I might just wet myself.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Aug 13, 2008 6:11:43 GMT -5
Unless Kaine has a serious gaffe as a VP candidate, he'd be a terrific pick from a political point of view. Obama has put 8-10 states in play that people would have never expected at the start of the year, and a Kaine pick would essentially lock VA in as one of the battlegrounds and one where McCain would have to burn serious resources. Of the ten battlegrounds identified on Pollster.com, all ten are "red states," and, in 4 of them, Obama is ahead and has a base of more than 270 EV's. McCain almost has to pick someone from one of the "red" battleground states just to narrow Obama's options. As a resident of Virginia, I don't see Kaine as all that popular nor capable of delivering the state to Obama. Mark Warner is another story as he is popular. |
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Aug 13, 2008 19:00:57 GMT -5
In any event, I think Obama may have his short list of 3-4 names right now, and the theme of the VP night of the convention might be telling. Kaine, Bayh, Gen. Jones, Joe Biden, and Sam Nunn are still not slated for their speaking time, if they're getting any. Rendell, McCaskill, Strickland, Sebelius, Napolitano, and Schweitzer have all been slated.
I don't believe Kaine is under as much consideration as rumored, but he is willing to keep his name out there to keep Obama's name in the media in VA.
|
|
hoyaLS05
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,652
|
Post by hoyaLS05 on Aug 13, 2008 19:06:06 GMT -5
In any event, I think Obama may have his short list of 3-4 names right now, and the theme of the VP night of the convention might be telling. Kaine, Bayh, Gen. Jones, Joe Biden, and Sam Nunn are still not slated for their speaking time, if they're getting any. Rendell, McCaskill, Strickland, Sebelius, Napolitano, and Schweitzer have all been slated. I don't believe Kaine is under as much consideration as rumored, but he is willing to keep his name out there to keep Obama's name in the media in VA. I think Gen. Jones is getting more attention from this board than anywhere else. Maybe I'm just swayed by this because it is what I've read most recently, but I think the Post's political blog (written by a Hoya, I might add) makes an excellent case for Joe Biden, a guy I really liked from the start. voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2008/08/the_case_for_joe_biden.html?nav=rss_blog |
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Aug 13, 2008 19:16:35 GMT -5
Mark Warner has been named keynote speaker for the Demos. I think this effectively eliminates Tim Kaine as the VP. Too much Virginia and not enough of other key states. Be prepared to be underwhelmed by Warner as a speaker.
|
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Aug 13, 2008 20:03:24 GMT -5
In any event, I think Obama may have his short list of 3-4 names right now, and the theme of the VP night of the convention might be telling. Kaine, Bayh, Gen. Jones, Joe Biden, and Sam Nunn are still not slated for their speaking time, if they're getting any. Rendell, McCaskill, Strickland, Sebelius, Napolitano, and Schweitzer have all been slated. I don't believe Kaine is under as much consideration as rumored, but he is willing to keep his name out there to keep Obama's name in the media in VA. I think Gen. Jones is getting more attention from this board than anywhere else. Maybe I'm just swayed by this because it is what I've read most recently, but I think the Post's political blog (written by a Hoya, I might add) makes an excellent case for Joe Biden, a guy I really liked from the start. voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2008/08/the_case_for_joe_biden.html?nav=rss_blogBiden has the right pedigree for the job, but he is awful on the trail. He is a Senator in the older sense of the term and more like an Orrin Hatch in that respect. He would be terribly off-message for an otherwise tightly messaged Obama campaign. He also voted to authorize the war in Iraq, which is the same strike in his column as is in Bayh's column. If Gary Hart kept his pants on, he would be a great pick right now. Graham of FL would also be an attractive pick, but he has those weird/silly notebooks that would just be a distraction. |
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Aug 13, 2008 20:23:32 GMT -5
Mark Warner has been named keynote speaker for the Demos. I think this effectively eliminates Tim Kaine as the VP. Too much Virginia and not enough of other key states. Be prepared to be underwhelmed by Warner as a speaker. I don't think it makes a difference. Zell Miller, whose political career is fairly forgettable, gave the 2004 RNC Keynote. It was a morose speech and did not appeal to any extent to the finest of American values. The speech that Americans will tune into at the 2008 DNC will come on the final day of the convention. No speaker on the earlier days can overshadow Obama on the stage when it comes to ability. I think the speakers announced thus far are a good slate of "new leaders" in American politics, with the exceptions of Hillary and Bill Clinton. |
|
|
|
Post by StPetersburgHoya (Inactive) on Aug 14, 2008 0:31:05 GMT -5
It won't be Kaine - Warner is key-noting the night before. Clinton is also out. Since the theme of the night the vp is speaking is national security/defense there are some names like Nun, Biden, and possibly Richardson (as well as Reed and Hagel) which look more likely than Evan Bayh.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Aug 14, 2008 10:03:40 GMT -5
McCain is apparently floating an idea to have a pro-choice person as his running mate, like Ridge. With a pro-life VP he has a 10-20% chance of winning but with a pro-choice VP his odds are zero. Anecdotal evidence: listening to a radio station this morning and the host posed the question as to what would be the reaction of Republicans. All of the callers said essentially the same thing that they would not vote for McCain if he picked a pro-choice running mate. The rationale was that adherence to deep beliefs are more important than winning elections. I might add I will also not vote for McCain if he picks a pro-choice VP.
|
|
|
|
Post by HoyaSinceBirth on Aug 14, 2008 10:10:00 GMT -5
I'm pro life but i think it would be silly not to vote for a canidate because they're pro choice or worse their Vp is pro choice. My logic is this. A pro life canidate isn't going to overturn roe vs. wade anyway so what's the point. So this canidate says the believe in something you believe in. He's not going to act on that belief so it doesn't seem to be a big deal to me.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Aug 14, 2008 10:16:45 GMT -5
I'm pro life but i think it would be silly not to vote for a canidate because they're pro choice or worse their Vp is pro choice. My logic is this. A pro life canidate isn't going to overturn roe vs. wade anyway so what's the point. So this canidate says the believe in something you believe in. He's not going to act on that belief so it doesn't seem to be a big deal to me. A pro-life candidate has the potential for overturning Roe v Wade through the appointment of Supreme Court judges who believe that life begins at conception. As for the VP, let's face it, McCain is old and there would be a reasonable chance the VP would become President. And, if McCain were to win his VP becomes one of the major candidates for President in the next election. |
|
|
|
Post by HoyaSinceBirth on Aug 14, 2008 10:22:44 GMT -5
of course he has the potential but we've had prolife presidents since roe vs. wade who have done nothing about it. I honestly don't believe mccain will either.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,988
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Aug 14, 2008 10:34:10 GMT -5
of course he has the potential but we've had prolife presidents since roe vs. wade who have done nothing about it. I honestly don't believe mccain will either. Done nothing about it? The Supreme Court is at a very crucial juncture right now with several of the traditional liberal judges (for lack of a more appropriate term) ready to retire. It's a 4-4-1 court right now. Yes, the liberals may hang on if McCain gets elected, but Alito, Thomas, Roberts and Scalia aren't going anywhere. Replacing one of the other judges with a conservative shifts the court immensely. |
|
vcjack
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,875
|
Post by vcjack on Aug 14, 2008 10:41:47 GMT -5
More importantly, there's no chance the Democrats don't control the Senate after this election, so no anti Roe V Wade judge could get in. But by 2012 things may be different.
|
|
hoyaLS05
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,652
|
Post by hoyaLS05 on Aug 14, 2008 10:50:20 GMT -5
McCain is apparently floating an idea to have a pro-choice person as his running mate, like Ridge. With a pro-life VP he has a 10-20% chance of winning but with a pro-choice VP his odds are zero. Anecdotal evidence: listening to a radio station this morning and the host posed the question as to what would be the reaction of Republicans. All of the callers said essentially the same thing that they would not vote for McCain if he picked a pro-choice running mate. The rationale was that adherence to deep beliefs are more important than winning elections. I might add I will also not vote for McCain if he picks a pro-choice VP. Even if you do not approve of the pro-choice VP, what do you expect from Obama and his VP? Wouldn't you rather a President and a VP who agree with you on all the other issues? |
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Aug 14, 2008 10:58:09 GMT -5
McCain is apparently floating an idea to have a pro-choice person as his running mate, like Ridge. With a pro-life VP he has a 10-20% chance of winning but with a pro-choice VP his odds are zero. Anecdotal evidence: listening to a radio station this morning and the host posed the question as to what would be the reaction of Republicans. All of the callers said essentially the same thing that they would not vote for McCain if he picked a pro-choice running mate. The rationale was that adherence to deep beliefs are more important than winning elections. I might add I will also not vote for McCain if he picks a pro-choice VP. Even if you do not approve of the pro-choice VP, what do you expect from Obama and his VP? Wouldn't you rather a President and a VP who agree with you on all the other issues? Another illustration that some people do not understand the depths of commitment of real pro-life people to the sanctity of human life. The other issues are a very poor second or third in our minds. They don't matter in comparison to our desire to stop killing babies. We will never pull the lever to vote for someone who is in favor of allowing people the "choice" to kill their babies. To vote for such people is to be complicit in the killing. |
|
|
|
Post by Coast2CoastHoya on Aug 14, 2008 11:07:50 GMT -5
if life begins at conception, does than mean our 21st birthdays are actually our 20-years-and-3-months birthdays? 'cause you know, that could really clear up some confusion on campus  |
|
|
|
Post by williambraskyiii on Aug 14, 2008 11:15:42 GMT -5
keep laughing C2C...you'll won't be laughing when it is 800 degrees in Hell and no one will give you a sip of their water.
I am jay kay'ing in case it isn't clear.
|
|
thebin
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,869
|
Post by thebin on Aug 14, 2008 11:17:45 GMT -5
If Obama picks Kaine, I'll happily bet anyone that it doesn't deliver Virginia for him. iPhones are so cool, I think I might just wet myself. VPs never carry anything come Nov. |
|
hifigator
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,387
|
Post by hifigator on Aug 14, 2008 11:59:11 GMT -5
I don't want to get into another extended abortion debate. My views haven't changed. I believe that abortion is wrong. I believe that the convenience of abortions have caused a tremendous amount of bad decisions. I also believe that what I think about morality isn't something that can be transferred from me to others on any grand scale. As a Christian, I might see things as being "right" that are illegal. Similarly, I might see things as being "wrong" but legal. Simply put, there is a difference between a morally right or wrong act and a societally legal or illegal act. I understand others not recognizing this difference, I just don't agree with them. Thus I don't have a litmus test requiring a candidate to be pro-life, even though I would prefer that people not have abortions.
On the politicaly scale, as much as I think ed is right, I would encourage people to think otherwise. I would encourage people to look at the poicies as a whole, and not foces too much on any one. I would encourage people to understand that we have only 2 options right now. When we have a viable third party or a strong independent candidate, that might change, but right now we have a choice between Obama and McCain. I understand that staying home is a third option on a personal level, but on the grand scale that is not a "real" option.
Lastly, I think that more people need to swallow their pride on the abortion issue -- and others for that matter. I think that far too often people are effectively counter-productive. If the pro-life crowd would budge a little, then the pro-choice crowd might also. The result might be what we might all agree to be a step in the right direction, for instance more restrictions on the late/partial birth abortion for example. In other words, it might be more effective to actually give a little to get a little. As it is now, the "threat" of overturning Roe v. Wade is so very real to the pro-choicers that they almost instinctively unite in one accord against any and all proposals to restrict abortion in any way shape or form. Similarly, they provide their own litmus test of any potential candidate or judge that is pro-life. I just think the entire issue is too polarizing and people seem unable to recognize this.
As for VP speculation, another name came up last night on Hannity and Colmes. Hannity said that serious rumors that McCain is again considering Lieberman. Newt Gingrich agreed with ed in saying that it would be the kiss of death for McCain's chances. That's too bad in my opinion. I would really like to see a truly moderate ticket get a shot. Obama is so liberal, that even a selection of Lieberman couldn't swing the ticket to the middle, but it wouldn't hurt him much.
|
|
