cocksure wrote:

Rick Reuben wrote:

cocksure wrote:Eight-year-old story confirming that McCain's a belligerent hick, posted in a thread about Obama's VP. Okay, I guess.

Are you a moron?

At least as often as the next person.

It's relevant to Jim Webb, potential Obama VP.

He's not mentioned in the story, so you'll have to connect the dots for me.

You're not paying attention.

Rick Reuben wrote:

connor wrote:Ever watch Webb's response to the President's State of the Union? A large portion is dedicated to economics, class disparity in particular.

Jim Webb as VP sets up an interesting scenario: Jim Webb's wife is Vietnamese. John McCain has defiantly said that he will continue to refer to Vietnamese as 'gooks', because of his time as a POW.

connor wrote:
You're not paying attention.

Okay, getting there. My eyes tend to gloss over RR's posts.

Reality? No.
Winning ticket? Huge

Real Balls would be selecting Chuck Hagel. An anti-Iraq war moderate Republican, Vietnam Vet, with tons of foreign policy experience who completely de-fuzes McCain.

Rick Reuben wrote:

cocksure wrote:Okay, getting there. My eyes tend to gloss over RR's posts.

Then why does your very limited posting history show you all around threads I'm working? It's obvious this 'cocksure' is a second account used by a forum regular. His posts are grammatically correct, so Gramsci is out as a suspect. Based on the politics of his posts and on his frequent use of embedded links, I suspect that 'cocksure' might be Andrew L.

Hey, did you ever find out who pilfered your quart of strawberries?

ktone wrote:Reality? No.
Winning ticket? Huge

Real Balls would be selecting Chuck Hagel. An anti-Iraq war moderate Republican, Vietnam Vet, with tons of foreign policy experience who completely de-fuzes McCain.

Chuck Hagel is pretty conservative, with no neo- involved.

Fiscally real tight. Anti-abortion, anti-gay rights.

He seems like a decent human being, but he's not going to be on a ticket with Obama. Odds-on favorite for sec'y of defense in any Obama white house.

Colin Powell just might run with Obama if asked. I think he could rehabilitate himself in the eyes of most Democrats, given a chance.

My personal pick is Bill Bradley, but that's probably not a winner.

tmidgett wrote:Anti-abortion, anti-gay rights

[...]

He seems like a decent human being.

I'm struggling a little to put these two together in a way that makes sense.

simmo wrote:

tmidgett wrote:Anti-abortion, anti-gay rights

[...]

He seems like a decent human being.

I'm struggling a little to put these two together in a way that makes sense.

You can have a principled position and be wrong.

I have friends and relatives who have positions like that, and I think they are wrong, but they're decent people.

Chuck Hagel seems like a principled individual.

It would be too much to put him on the ticket. I don't think Ob wants (or will need) that kind of capitulation.

My worry is about Hillary Clinton. She might actually want to be Obama's Veep. She would totally undermine his administration along with Bill. Obama doesn't need a bunch of bad press for not picking her (and he doesn't need the Clintons on his ass 24/7 for nine years)...remember what Rahm Emanuel said, "how the loser loses will determine who wins in November"...

A majority of Democrats want Obama to pick Hillary as his running mate. How do people not see what a bad idea that is? Democrats are as stupid and shortsighted organizationally as Republicans are stupid and shortsighted on the issues.

What do you guys think?

tmidgett wrote:
You can have a principled position and be wrong.

I have friends and relatives who have positions like that, and I think they are wrong, but they're decent people.

Same here. Growing up, I knew all kinds of people who on the one hand had views on politics & culture that I found horrible, and yet the way they conducted themselves as a people was totally right on. On the other hand, I've seen the opposite happen, where someone shares my political views, but at the same time are total pieces of shit. There can be a lot of gray.

Minotaur029 wrote:My worry is about Hillary Clinton. She might actually want to be Obama's Veep. She would totally undermine his administration along with Bill. Obama doesn't need a bunch of bad press for not picking her (and he doesn't need the Clintons on his ass 24/7 for nine years)...remember what Rahm Emanuel said, "how the loser loses will determine who wins in November"...

A majority of Democrats want Obama to pick Hillary as his running mate. How do people not see what a bad idea that is? Democrats are as stupid and shortsighted organizationally as Republicans are stupid and shortsighted on the issues.

What do you guys think?

It's probably a winning ticket. I know HRC's negs are high, but there's a case for sticking all the Dem votes from the primary together and saying 'beat that.'

That said, the Clintons both have OCEANS of baggage that hasn't even been sniffed by the Obama campaign.

And I highly doubt he wants to saddle himself with any of that, or the general drama that goes along with those two.

You know what, I'm going to predict, right now, that he'll ask Colin Powell to do it. If Powell demurs, we may never find out that he asked. But I think he'll ask.