Among the oft-named finalists:
Hillary would be a home run for the reasons you stated
Kathleen Sibelius a triple; moderate woman with "red" appeal
Evan Byah would be a double; safe, unexciting, "red" appeal
Joe Biden a single; experienced but often aggravating
Tim Kaine a strike out; inexperienced, no major accomplishments I've heard of as a governor.

Given the pretty poor performance of the Obama campaign since Hillary's concession in the primaries, I expect Biden but have a fear that Kaine will be the choice.

I'll go out on a limb and say Brian Schweitzer, the Democratic governor of Montana and an early Obama supporter.

The intrade markets have Biden at just under 50% with the others (as well as Wesley Clark at around 10%) spliting up the rest. Biden seems like a reasonable choice, at least he's entertaining! I certainly don't think there are any "home runs" in VP choices... Personally I think I would be borderline irresponsible to pick Hillary, due to the likelihood that she might try to undermine Obama (IIRC Bill has yet to really endorce Obama).

I may be a bit biased as a Hoosier, but my bet is on Bayh. He's accomplished, moderate, and it appears that he himself is being groomed for his own presidential run at some point (he's always an "almost-ran" for prez and vp). I think Bayh as a VP would put IN (a staunch red state) into play for the Dems, especially since Obama has been polling relatively well (if I recall properly; its' been awhile since I've read an article about polling)

Sibelius was in Iowa yesterday meeting with Obama campaign staff. Probably getting ready to show up in Illinois.

Well...I tend to look at things sideways, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if it's Chuck Hagel. THAT would sure throw a wrench at Joe Lieberman (aka "Slappy the Clown").

I was predicting Bayh earlier this week, and I'm sticking with that. Lots of people seem to think Biden though.

I really can't see it being Clinton, but I've been wrong many times before. :)

steviededalus:

I'm also guessing Bayh. Obama doesn't need exciting. He needs reliable. Bayh won't shoot Obama in the foot by saying anything stooopid. He is a safe, experienced, white, Midwestern Protestant. For the first black major party nominee, and the first Muslim (just kidding!), this will send the "right signal" to Typical White Persons.

I had a gut sense that he would not choose another senator. But Bayh is a former governor, so he has "run something." He comes across as moderate, which may help obscure his 100% NARAL rating (My theory being that Catholics in Ohio and Pennsylvania will hold the key to this election).

This won't put Indiana in play: Hoosiers like the Bayhs, but not enough to elect Obama. Especially since he's running against a veteran and war hero.

So I proclaim he will choose: Birch Evans Bayh III

Dave N:
Finally, selecting Governor Sebelius would separate the idea of a female Vice President with the idea that such a female running mate has to be Hillary Clinton. The Clinton people have advanced the rather sexist argument that there is only one Democratic female politician capable of being Vice President or President--a rather odd (and untrue)assertion.

That has actually been my (final) reason for saying Sebelius won't get the nomination. A recent poll has 20% of Hillary supporters now backing McCain. Wou;dn't Hillary and co. take the choice of another woman--over that of the obvious woman-- as a stick in the eye? It could make things u g l y .

I honestly think that there are a lot of disaffected younger conservatives/libertarians who aren't opposed to Obama, but don't really like McCain. But if Obama were to choose Hillary as his VP, he would very likely alienate those undecided voters. I don't think that the potential gain of the die-hard Hillary supporters or the older female undecideds would be enough to balance that loss out.

Think Biden or Bayh are Obama's best options.

For no other reason than it strikes my fancy and I'm a Georgian, I say Sam Nunn. Yeah, there are a ton of reasons why it won't happen, but it would pretty much lock up Georgia for Obama and might have a spill over for South &North Carolina.

No other candidate would so shore up Obama's still shaky support among Democratic women

Obama is doing much better among women than John Kerry did. How is his support "shaky" among democratic women then?

I think it's going to be Biden. Bayh or Kaine would be very poor picks for the reasons others have already mentioned. Obama isn't going to win Indiana. Democrats made the mistake last cycle of picking a candidate (John Edwards) on his supposed ability to bring in his otherwise red state (North Carolina) into the democratic fold. That didn't work out too well. Also note that if Bayh were selected, the democrats would end up losing a Senate seat that they otherwise might not be able to win back. Kaine is boring, not very popular in VA, and would add little to the ticket. As far as Sebelius, I think she would be an excellent pick, but it appears that there would be too many complaints if Obama picked a woman not named Hillary. (Ironic that Hillary supporters were saying that Obama supporters had fallen victim to the cult of personality during the primary.)

Hoosier, If Catholics hold the key, so to speak, in OH and PA and perhaps elsewhere, Sen Obama might not want to choose the one who has been excommunicated more or less (Gov Sebelius). And practicing Catholics who vote are not liable to be overly impressed by Sen Biden or Gov Kaine in any event, neither of whom are pro-life in any way other than the one perceived peculiarly by the Kmiecs and Mornings Minions of the world. I think that Sen Obama will go with Sen Bayh, if only in order not to have to fuss with the intra-Catholic issues.

Sebelius for Obama. She's more qualified to be President than Barack (but who isn't?), but she's among the very few contenders who's resume won't completely eclipse O's.

Hillary is the obvious choice, but has probably never been in the running for some very good reasons. Bob Bechel can call the rumors of Michelle O's "whitey tape" a Republican smear all he wants, but Obama and his people know damned well where it originated. There are lots of good reasons to 86 Hill's name, but I'll bet the discussion never got beyond this one point.

I predict McCain will pick someone younger and more conservative than himself, but that includes pretty much everybody who's not already a Democrat.

People picking Hillary should put down the crack pipe.

I'll go out on a limb with Schweitzer of Montana also, I don't think Obama will choose another Senator, nor any woman.

For someone who has a problem with coming across as haughty and arrogant, telling the public and the press, "I know who my running mate will be, but I'm not going to tell you," seems like an odd strategy.

I predict Bayh. Biden would have made great sense as a running mate for Hillary, but the war-related votes and speeches from Biden (especially the one about not wanting his grandchildren to have to go bck to Iraq in 15-20 years because we didn't finish the job) make for several months of effective ads about how even Obama's running mate thinks his foreign policy proposals are dangerous.

If it's Hillary, it's because the choice was forced on Obama by superdelegates.

Nick

I predict Bayh as well. (I'm thinking though that Obama may surprise us with someone the media hasn't been focusing on at all.)

It won't be Hillary. I thought that, but my friends who are Democrats told me I was crazy and I'm starting to agree. However, it can't be a woman, because Hillary supporters would flip. Thus, it really comes down to Bayh or Biden, and Bayh seems safer than Biden for Obama.

I'm of the general opinion that Obama needs a VP pick that will shake things up in some way. His poll numbers are fading, his campaign has had trouble getting on a message, and McCain's negative ads are taking a toll. Heck, I've started to question my support for Obama, and there's no way in heck I'll ever vote for McCain.

Of the finalists, there's only two picks that will cause a quake: Hillary or Sibelius. The others are all just *shrug* picks.

I think McCain will play it safe and go with Pawlenty. Bland, middle-aged white guy. Pawlenty won't hurt, but won't help either. Heck, Pawlenty almost certainly would have been voted out of office in 2006 if an independent Democrat hadn't pulled over 6% of the vote.

Prepared to be president = a woman
Able to help him govern = a governor
Willing to challenge his thinking = ?

Two names that haven't been mentioned: Janet Napolitano and Mark Warner. I assume Warner has already said he wouldn't be interested, but what about JN?

McCain goes with Romney, no one else is close. The psycho-evangelicals would love a Brownback or a Santorum, but they're way too young looking and they have high negatives.

Drudge has it that Clinton was never vetted. (The story relies on a single anonymous source, though.)

I havent got the remotest idea--but I am fascinated in the Friday afternoon or Sat AM news release coming right into the convention. This does not impress me as good timing and missing the news cycle. These times are usually used for putting out bad info. Anyone got any thoughts on that?

Edwards? I know that sounds crazy, but is it possible?

DG: No.

I agree with rarango. I can't imagine what would lead the campaign to announce the VP choice on a late-summer Friday. Very odd timing, especially after all the teasing all week.

I predict Bayh, but as a McCain voter I hope for Joe "I have a much higher I.Q. than you do/You cannot go into a Dunkin Donuts or a 7-Eleven unless you have a slight Indian accent" Biden

Womanizer. Sorry.

To a Democrat, that's a feature.

Can't be a governor - Obama needs at least some foreign policy cred and can't get it that way. A governor would also immediately draw a contrast with Obama's lack of elected executive experience, raising questions about how he would utilize it without becoming a figurehead.

Can't be a woman other than Hillary, and it ain't Hillary - Obama has a problem with blue-collar men, not women. Picking a woman other than Hillary would cause a revolt among her supporters since she pretty much meets his criteria. I think the fact she's already setup as a prime time speaker and is having her name placed in nomination with the roll call theater pretty much says she's not it. Besides, Hillary is much better positioned for 2012 outside the administration giving her reason to turn it down even if Obama offered it. If McCain wins, she's the front runner for the nomination. If Obama wins but struggles she has a plausible base for challenging him. She can regulate her support for him much better outside his administration than in it.

gotta be lightweight - Can't overshadow His Articulateness without him becoming Dukakis with a tan.


By process of elimination, it's probably Biden of the three mentioned. He's got the foreign policy credentials, mainstream Democrat views, experienced but nothing that would make the Dems wish the ticket was reversed. The other telling point is 'willing to challenge his thinking'. That seems to be a way of saying that it's ok to have *not* been an enthusiastic Obama booster from the get go. (possibly innoculation against a reprise of Biden's "articulate" comment?)

How about Christine Todd Whitman for McCain's VP? It could help him with the independents and women. Granted, she probably is not pro-life, so she will not help with the religious right, but they will probably grumble and vote for him rather than let Democrats win.

"On the other hand, do we know what states Romney would deliver, if any?"

I don't think you can guarantee that any pick will deliver a state. However, a Romney selection would help McCain in Michigan where Romney's father was a respected and popular governor. (It was no accident that Romney beat McCain in Michigan during the primary). Romney could also aid McCain in potential swing states that have significant Mormon populations such as Colorado and Nevada. And given his time as governor of Massachusetts, Romney’s name recognition could offer some support for McCain in neighboring New Hampshire. Picking Romney for VP could influence these races, but his selection would probably not be decisive unless the margin of victory is narrow. Still, in a close race, the little things matter.

One Man's View,

The problem with your analysis is that is premised on the Vice President helping carry that person's specific state--and not on other characeristics that strengthen the overall ticket.

You suggested California, but while I think Diane Feinstein is an attractive candidate in many ways, if Obama isn't already carrying California in November, then McCain is on his way to 49 state landslide.

Sebelius doesn't help carry Kansas (though the margin MIGHT be slightly narrower if she is on the ticket), but she helps as a female governor in a red state--the kind of change Obama has been claiming to want. Because of the Sebelius family background, she provides the appearance, if not the substance, of bipartisanship. Additionally, she helps with Ohio since she grew up there and her father was Governor.

I would agree with you on Richardson, except that he was such an awful candidate when running for President.

"As for Obama/Hillary, think Vince Foster. He wouldn't dare."

Is Obama suicidal?

Dave N: "I would agree with you on Richardson, except that he was such an awful candidate when running for President."

I actually was leaning toward supporting him . . . until he started campaigning. What stunned me was how ignorant he proved to be on basic issues that were being discussed and voted upon in Washington. He had falled totally out of touch, to the point where it was clear he didn't even read the newspapers.

Plus, yeah, he creeps-out women with his tendency to play grab-ass.

McCain will choose Pawlenty. I have verified this with my son's 'Magic 8-Ball.'

Hoosier,

I am thinking you (and your son's Magic Eight Ball) are right on Pawlenty. Relatively young (Obama's age), relatively safe.

I have always been a big fan of Bobby Jindal, but he has said rather emphatically that he has the job he has always wanted. Besides, if McCain loses this year, Jindal will be ideally positioned to run for President in 2012.

I like the idea of the Republicans naming a female. The problem becomes the right wing of the Republican Party wanting the same kind of ideological purity on abortion that the Democrats have been accused of requiring in the past. That eliminates Senators Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, for example.

Sarah Palin would be an interesting "outside the box" choice. My concern is that the selection of a person who has been Governor for two years and on the city council and mayor of a town with 8500 people would make Barack Obama look over-qualified.

"Frankly, going back 40 years, the only running mate I can think of who MAY have helped was Al Gore in 1992--though I think Tennessee would have gone Democratic that year regardless."

If you go back just a bit further, Lyndon Johnson stands out as a VP pick that really impacted the Kennedy-Nixon race by bringing Texas -- and perhaps more broadly by aiding the ticket in the South. Johnson seems to be the exception rather than the rule.

If so few VP choices are able to alter the outcome of the race, perhaps the best advice to any candidate selecting a running mate is to simply "do no harm."

I doubt it'll be Hillary. The Clintons survived their own terms in office only because no one with a voice (except Limbaugh, who was preaching to the choir) covered their misdeeds. This time around, their sins of omission and commission would be brought back and publicly dissected in exquisite detail.

Whoever Obama picks is likely to be an unadventurous choice, on the theory that First Black President is about as much change as most Americans are willing to make at one time. Some boring white guy, then.

My crazy guess is Chet Edwards, for a few simple reasons. 1) He's from Texas.
2) He's got a strong record on veteran's issues, but isn't a Washington insider by any means.
3) I had never heard of this person until last week, when all of a sudden his name bubbled up in VP speculations all over CNN and other mainstream news outlets.

I predict that Obama picks Senator Casey (D-OH): suck it NRAL!

Well, now that I've convinced you, Cenrad, I'm puzzled by this info someone just told me:
Try www.obamanelson.com in your browser.

Njones,

Casey is Senator from Pennsylvania. But Obama doesn't need a running mate who has been in the U.S. Senate even less time than he has.

With respect to Chet Edwards, evidently Nancy Pelosi is pushing him. Frankly, I am not sure how being a Congressman from one of many Congressional Districts somehow makes the state competitive.

As for Napolitano, the Democrats tried that stunt in 1988, when Michael Dukakis picked Lloyd Bentsen as his running mate. It didn't work then; it won't work now. In the 1988 election, Texans very happily split their tickets, voting FOR Bentsen for U.S. Senate and AGAINST Bentsen for Vice President.

Some people are discounting how much Romney would bring to McCain's ticket. I can, for myself only, adding Romney to the ticket is the ONLY thing that would get me to vote for McCain. If he goes with Lieberman, Ridge, or Pawlenty, I'm gonna vote for Bob Barr. Pawlenty might be better than Lieberman, but Pawlenty has fallen into that nonsense about the GOP having to "update" itself by accepting a greatly expanded role for government. I can understand making compromises in a lefty state like Minnesota, but he talks about it as if he wants the whole party to move in that direction.

Although McCain has helped himself in the last week with the evangelical wing of the GOP, McCain has pretty lackluster and lukewarm support from the "National Review and Rush Limbaugh" wing of conservatism, and Romney would shore that up overnight. As you may recall, the C-PAC attendees were solidly pro-Romney and anti-McCain after Super Tuesday.

Intrade has Biden as the overwhelming favorite. It also has Romney up big, but less so than Biden.

Re: Biden

Would Obama pick a veep who was so outspokenly in favor of the war? Biden was out in front of Bayh in this regard. I don't think the Kos Kreeps would react well to that.

LM,

"I think (hope) 2000 sobered up about as many on the fringe as possible to the cost of ignoring political reality."

That's certainly true - it's the only reality now they don't ignore. On the other hand, what they consider reality and what the average voter considers reality diverges more every day.

That was Buckley's genius - booting the fringe for the long term good of the party.

To quote Yode:

Always two there are, no more, no less: a master and an apprentice.

Thus, I predict that Obama will pick a moldable minion, or at least a true believer.

The Clintons survived their own terms in office only because no one with a voice (except Limbaugh, who was preaching to the choir) covered their misdeeds.

Other than whole impeachment thing, you mean?

Did I mention the funny joke about how Hillary killed Vince Foster? I was hoping to work it in somehow.

Hahaha it's a joke.

But not really.

Or is it?

Maybe they're going there to arrest Biden?