home

Given the Obama Rules, Biden Was The Best Choice Politically

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 01:44:56 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Personally, I am not a fan of Joe Biden's policies, especially on foreign policy. But, the most important function of a Vice Presidential pick is to help the Presidential nominee win. Under that standard, given the Obama Rules (no Clinton or Clark), Biden was his best option.

Below, I criticize the rollout of Biden. But I do not criticize the choice from a political standpoint, given Obama's stubborn refusal to pick the person who would have helped him the most politically, Hillary Clinton.

Once the Not Hillary decision was made (and once Obama ran for the hills on McCain's Hanoi Hilton defense to everything), Joe Biden made the most sense. He does not help much, but he helps. And that is better than hurting - as a Bayh, Kaine or Sebelius would have done.

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only

< Saturday Afternoon Open Thread | Obama-Biden Springfield Appearance Thread >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Given the Obama Rules, Biden Was The Best Choice Politically | 78 comments (78 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    John King is going over the PA map (5.00 / 0) (#1)
    by andgarden on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 01:48:16 PM EST
    on CNN right now. Scranton, just as I said.

    You think PA wasn't a concern, but I guarantee you that Dem elected officials in NE PA were concerned.

    BTW, I expect (none / 0) (#3)
    by andgarden on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 01:54:34 PM EST
    McCain to give up on Michigan and the Northeast. He's going to have to defend Colorado, and I think he might choose Bill Owens.

    Parent
    Bill Owens?!? (none / 0) (#20)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 02:04:08 PM EST
    OMG, that is the funniest thing I've read all morning!  

    There is soooooo much dirt on old "Family Values" Billy Bob waiting to see the light of day, it would be a bloodbath.

    Also, Bill Owens wouldn't carry Colorado.  Very few, Republican or Democrat, like him.

    Parent

    Talk about moving right along! (none / 0) (#21)
    by oculus on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 02:06:11 PM EST
    Off to Google.

    Parent
    Interesting (none / 0) (#26)
    by andgarden on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 02:09:00 PM EST
    Last I saw, his numbers were pretty good in CO.

    Parent
    Besides... (none / 0) (#31)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 02:26:13 PM EST
    being the worst gov. ever and the whole TABOR thing, there's his personal life.  Think John Edwards plus an extra little added.

    Numbers don't always tell the full story.  You can't quantify real life.

    Parent

    I really don't know a lot of (none / 0) (#38)
    by Jjc2008 on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 02:40:16 PM EST
    Coloradoans who liked Owens.  And I am in one of the reddest counties in the state.  Dumb pick even for a republican.

    Parent
    On the topic of giving up states (none / 0) (#53)
    by standingup on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 03:30:22 PM EST
    I heard someone on CNN last night say that Obama has supposedly given up advertising in some states he was targeting.  It was one of those developments that was overshadowed by other events.  I can't recall all but believe NC was one of them.  

    Parent
    Obama's electoral strategy (none / 0) (#77)
    by RedSox04 on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 10:00:49 AM EST
    has always been foolish, and he's wasted millions of dollars so far, in advertising in states like NC and AL.  It depended on the idea that somehow Obama could defy all history by getting black turnout to increase dramatically, WITHOUT white turnout increasing proportionately, something that has always happened in Southern states.

    Obama should win this election, but he's doing everything he can to make it a nailbiter, and dragging down the Democratic Party with it.  Obama's a sleeper agent all right, but for the GOP.  Between his post-partisanship unity schtick (read: no culpability for the Bush administration's misdeeds, appeal to Republicans, dismiss lifelong Democrats) and his negative coattails, Obama's the best thing that could ever happen to a post-Bush Republican Party.

    Parent

    old money (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by pixelpusher on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 01:53:31 PM EST
    Seems to me that the Dems' "old money" demanded that Obama choose someone over-familiar.  I'll bet the small-money donor stream is dead.

    He makes me feel a bit better (5.00 / 2) (#4)
    by nycstray on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 01:54:36 PM EST
    than the others in that he does have a lot of experience. On the other hand, he also reinforces what a rookie Obama is, imo. And that is just from looking at photos of the 2. Once he starts campaigning, I'm not sure he won't have the same effect as Hillary, aka as why is the obviously more qualified one in the VP slot? I realize it worked out "ok" for Bush, but this just looks so wrong to me. And are we really doing this again?!

    Thank Goodness (none / 0) (#48)
    by Cards In 4 on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 02:59:11 PM EST
    As a conservative that comes to this site because it  has more sensible people than any of the other left blogs, I can say I'm glad it's Biden and not HRC.  She was the only VP that would have clinched the election for Obama. The nominal votes McCain would get from Republicans voting against Clinton would be swamped by the demographics that supported her. Axelrod and company didn't want to admit that, except for the caucases where the moveon crowd pushed Obama, she kicked his ass.  

    Even with spending most of his life in the Senate, Biden is a lightweight on the issues compared to HRC who has the ability to explain a position in 30 seconds or less.  Biden takes 10 minutes just to get warmed up.

    I disagree with a lot of HRC positions but it's hard to argue she was a better candidate and and the best VP for the ticket.  

    Parent

    Wes Clark wouldn't (none / 0) (#66)
    by koshembos on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 04:29:48 PM EST
    Raise the question why is Obama number 1. Still he wasn't selected. BTD Obama rules are correct in my view. I would say that Obama rules are "don't select any strong personally, she/he will overshadow me." I think that Obama made a cowardly choice. Also, Biden is not an attack dog of any significance. To demolish McCain you need a Wes Clark and the Democrats have other Weses.

    Parent
    Clark's Problem (none / 0) (#68)
    by Cards In 4 on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 06:42:14 PM EST
    is that he is not a good campaigner.  He was a disaster on the trail 4 years ago and a lot of Republicans were praying he could somehow win the nomination.  Biden is as big a gaffe machine but at least he's been through a lot of campaigns.  And Clark still wouldn't bring HRC's demos to the polls, he's more Biden in a uniform.

    Again, I'm very happy seeing Biden next to Obama.

    Parent

    The text message (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by