Who Are Potential Vice Presidential Candidates for Obama and Clinton?

[Ivan Seeking]

Assuming that Obama takes it, which is looking better all the time, I am thinking that Obama-Webb would be a great combination. In fact Webb might be a great VP for either Hillary or Obama. He is strong, decisive, and a no-nonsense guy. He has a rich history with the military, and he used to be a Republican.

A 1968 graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy, Webb served as a Marine Corps infantry officer until 1972, and is a highly decorated Vietnam War combat veteran. During his four years with the Reagan administration, Webb served as the first Assistant Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs, then as Secretary of the Navy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Webb

Turbo, I think Webb may be just the type of guy that you had in mind in our discussion about conservatives.

Any president of either party would be wise to include a conservative of Buckley's ilk in their top tier of advisers

 

[turbo]

Webb might be a good VP candidate, thought I would hate to see his Senate seat vacated. There are plenty of people out there that would be attractive. I have a friend in CA that would have great appeal. His name is Ed Feldman, and he is a straight shooter and a war hero. Scroll down to page 10.

http://www.firstcoastdoctor.com/november_2006_issue_4.pdf

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Yay! CNN just reported that Webb is being considered.

 

[Gokul43201]

Webb would help tip Virginia towards the Dems, but I think that Obama might be able to do that without the help. What would be a coup to end all coups will be if Obama wants and gets Hagel. And what a message that would send!

 

[Ivan Seeking]

I'm not thinking of Va, I'm thinking of the military and those concerned about experience in military matters. He would also attract many independents [like me] who would like to see a conservative on the ticket.

Hagel doesn't jump off the page for me but might given some consideration.

Several days ago I started thinking of Webb - he really impressed me during his campaign. And I esp liked it when to his face he told Bush to shove it, in not so many words. The man means what he says!

 

[Astronuc]

Webb would help tip Virginia towards the Dems, but I think that Obama might be able to do that without the help. What would be a coup to end all coups will be if Obama wants and gets Hagel. And what a message that would send!

Webb or Hagel would be good, but I agree that getting Hagel would be something. What a message indeed.


At this point, I just hope Obama means what he says, and is not just saying what folks want to hear.

Personally, I need to hear substantive discussion, with an acknowledgment of the problems, and realistic solutions.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Why would Hagel in particular be such a coup?

Btw, there have been nineteen debates. What has not been discussed?

 

[Astronuc]

Why would Hagel in particular be such a coup?

Btw, there have been nineteen debates. What has not been discussed?

Hagel is a Republican and conservative, and a critic of the current administration. On the other hand, there are many areas where I disagree with him.

http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/Chuck_Hagel.htm


I'll get back with regard to the debates after a I review a couple. I've heard sections, and bits and pieces, but not a whole debate.

 

[Gokul43201]

I'm not thinking of Va, I'm thinking of the military and those concerned about experience in military matters. He would also attract many independents [like me] who would like to see a conservative on the ticket.

Hagel doesn't jump off the page for me but might given some consideration.

Several days ago I started thinking of Webb - he really impressed me during his campaign. And I esp liked it when to his face he told Bush to shove it, in not so many words. The man means what he says!

I'm going to be lazy and go the Wiki way. Here are some tidbits:

Hagel is a Vietnam War veteran, having served in the United States Army infantry, attaining the rank of Sergeant (E-5) from 1967–1968. While serving during the Vietnam War, he received the Vietnamese Cross of Gallantry, Purple Heart, Army Commendation Medal, and the Combat Infantryman Badge.
...
After Reagan's inauguration as President, Hagel was named deputy administrator of the Veterans Administration. In 1982, however, he resigned his post over a disagreement with V.A. Administrator Robert P. Nimmo, who was intent on cutting funding for V.A. programs, and who had referred to veterans groups as "greedy", and to Agent Orange as not much worse than a "little teenage acne."
...
After leaving government employment, Hagel co-founded Vanguard Cellular, a mobile phone manufacturer that made him a millionaire several times over. While working with Vanguard, he served as president and chief executive officer of the United Service Organizations and the Private Sector Council, as deputy director and chief operating officer of the 1990 G7 Summit, and on the board of directors or advisory committee of the American Red Cross, the Eisenhower World Affairs Institute, Bread for the World, and the Ripon Society. He also served as Chairman of the Agent Orange Settlement Fund and is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations.
...
Six years later in 2002, Hagel overwhelmingly won re-election with over 83% of the vote, the largest margin of victory in any statewide race in Nebraska history.
...
In July 2007, Hagel was one of three Republican Senators who supported the legislation proposed by Democrats to require a troop withdrawal to begin within 120 days.
...
The New York Times reported on Saturday, September 8, 2007 that Hagel would retire from the Senate at the conclusion of his present term.
...
On August 18, 2005, Hagel compared the Iraq War to Vietnam and openly mocked Vice President Dick Cheney's assertion that the Iraqi insurgency was in its "last throes."

In November 2005, Hagel made a much-publicized statement: "To question your government is not unpatriotic — to not question your government is unpatriotic." This was in reference to the increasing amount of debate surrounding the Iraq War, and his assertion that the United States should withdraw its troops.

In December 2005, in reference to Bush, the GOP, and the PATRIOT Act, Hagel made a much-publicized statement: "I took an oath of office to the Constitution, I didn't take an oath of office to my party or my president.
...
In November 2007, he rated the Bush administration "the lowest in capacity, in capability, in policy, in consensus -- almost every area" of any presidency in the last forty years. He also revealed he is open to running as vice-president with the 2008 Democratic nominee. In the same month, he said, "I have to say this is one of the most arrogant, incompetent administrations I've ever seen or ever read about. They have failed the country."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_Hagel

Hagel = Decorated war hero + successful entrepreneur + immensely popular senior senator + champion of veterans affairs + vocal antipartisan maverick from the Republican party, much like McCain of not so long ago. This is the only time in recent history that I'm aware of, that a cross-party ticket is remotely possible. This could tear down so many walls - it would be historic.

And Obama has co-sponsored more bills with Hagel than with Webb (nearly as many as he shares with Ted Kennedy).

http://thomas.loc.gov/bss/d110query.html

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Those would be good reasons.

esp

In November 2005, Hagel made a much-publicized statement: "To question your government is not unpatriotic — to not question your government is unpatriotic." This was in reference to the increasing amount of debate surrounding the Iraq War, and his assertion that the United States should withdraw its troops.

and most important of all!

In December 2005, in reference to Bush, the GOP, and the PATRIOT Act, Hagel made a much-publicized statement: "I took an oath of office to the Constitution, I didn't take an oath of office to my party or my president.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

I'll get back with regard to the debates after a I review a couple. I've heard sections, and bits and pieces, but not a whole debate.

Hillary and Obama have been struggling to identify how they differ, so at times they have gotten very specific.

 

[Werg22]

I don't understand. In what way does having served in war better one's credentials? In the end, war is the business of killing - hero or not. Shouldn't political merit be the only measure to consider?

 

[Ivan Seeking]

I don't think we want soldiers as Presidents, but we want Presidents who have access to good military minds; for one because even an innocent political mistake could lead to war. It is always important to understand the military implications of any political action or world event. And we certainly want good military people at the President's side during a time of conflict or crisis.

In the case of Webb, he didn't just serve; he has served at the highest levels. Hagel doesn't seem to be as strong on this point. But decorated vets are generally perceived as being brave and patriotic.

 

[BobG]

I'm going to be lazy and go the Wiki way. Here are some tidbits:



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_Hagel

Hagel = Decorated war hero + successful entrepreneur + immensely popular senior senator + champion of veterans affairs + vocal antipartisan maverick from the Republican party, much like McCain of not so long ago. This is the only time in recent history that I'm aware of, that a cross-party ticket is remotely possible. This could tear down so many walls - it would be historic.

And Obama has co-sponsored more bills with Hagel than with Webb (nearly as many as he shares with Ted Kennedy).

http://thomas.loc.gov/bss/d110query.html

I'd say that on most issues Obama is definitely a liberal and Hagel is definitely a conservative. If you toss out the war, I'd find it inconceivable that Hagel would even consider the idea ... except, when asked on several occasions, he sounded like he'd accept a cabinet position in an Obama Presidency, let alone a VP slot. It would definitely pull in some Republicans that disagree with the war.

Sebelius of Kansas would be a more logical choice. A female conservative from the heartland, but still a Democrat. It would help defuse beating the first female candidate with a realistic shot at election and it just might give people in the heartland a reason to think they actually could have a place in the Democratic Party.

 

[Astronuc]

I'd like to see an administration in which both 'liberal' and 'conservative' perspectives represented.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Sebelius of Kansas would be a more logical choice.

Yes, and she has shown she can win an election in a red state.

As for a Obama-Hagel ticket, the flip side of that is McCain-Clinton.

 

[turbo]

Obama-Hagel? I'd cast that vote proudly!

 

[BobG]

Yes, and she has shown she can win an election in a red state.

As for a Obama-Hagel ticket, the flip side of that is McCain-Clinton.

The flip side of an Obama-Hagel ticket would be McCain-Leiberman. Clinton on a Republican ticket is just a funny idea.

In order of probability:

1. Obama-Hagel (Hagel supposedly has no political future to worry about, so it's at least possible; Sebelius and Strickland probably rank ahead of him even if he would accept)
2. McCain-Leiberman (nearly no possibility, especially since either Pawlenty or maybe Huckabee will be VP candidate; there are no other possibilities - on the other hand, Leiberman will be 2008's Zell Miller)
3. Kerry-McCain (as floated in 2004 - 0 possibility; it was just something to rile up Republicans)
4. Ron Paul-Ralph Nader
5. Clinton-Gingrich (the nearly 0 chance of Clinton winning the nomination drop this to slightly below zero?)
6. Obama-Limbaugh (Obama owes Limbaugh for releasing the superdelegates to vote for him)
7. O'Reilley-Olbermann (on a third party ticket)
8. McCain-Clinton

 

[RonPaul2008]

I didn't like any of the Democratic candidate choices and I still don't, that's why I voted in the Republican primary this time. Both Hilary Clinton and Barack Obama are socialists. The Republican choices aren't much better save for Ron Paul and a couple others.

If McCain is elected we will continue to see more of the same interventionist, big and powerful government, and welfare policies that have plauged us the last couple decades. There aren't any true fiscal conservatives and social liberals left but a small handful. Rebulicans have become only fiscal conservative in name. That said, the choice of candidates is apalling. The only way I will be voting is if Ron Paul is VP under McCain. Anything to give that great man some recognition the media has denied him, and give him the publicity he'll need one day to run for president again. Besides Ron Paul, are there any true pro-American politicians left, who would support the Constitution and uphold the visions of our founding fathers?

My dream ticket:
Ron Paul-David Duke 2008

 

[Evo]

Both Hilary Clinton and Barack Obama are socialists.

Please post a link to an authoritative source that shows this. We don't allow false claims here. Please read the guidelines.

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=113181

My dream ticket:
Ron Paul-David Duke 2008

Well, I guess there is no guessing where you stand.

 

[lisab]

My dream ticket:
Ron Paul-David Duke 2008

Is this the same David Duke who was a Grand Wizard in the KKK? The self-professed white nationalist?

 

[RonPaul2008]

It is not a false claim. Hilary Clinton and Barack Obama both wish to socialize health care. To do that they would have to raise taxes. They want to continue welfare and the other types of social programs already in place. Sounds like socialism to me. Would you not agree? If you would like me to go ahead and prove they are socialist, I can easily dig up their voting records.

 

[RonPaul2008]

Whatever personal views on race David Duke has is his own business. In my opinion, he would have sound non-interventionist foreign policy, though, and I am sure he would work with Ron Paul to halt illegal immigration. I don't neccesarrily agree with some of his racialist views.

 

[Evo]

It is not a false claim. Hilary Clinton and Barack Obama both wish to socialize health care. To do that they would have to raise taxes. They want to continue welfare and the other types of social programs already in place. Sounds like socialism to me. Would you not agree?

No I don't.

 

[RonPaul2008]

Hilary Clinton's voting records.
votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=55463

Barack Obama's voting records.
votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=9490

 

[Evo]

Hilary Clinton's voting records.
votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=55463

Barack Obama's voting records.
votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=9490

What is this supposed to be? I thought you didn't support them, but now you're posting their voting records in their support?

 

[RonPaul2008]

I do not support either, that's why I posted those links. Please don't put words into my mouth.

 

[Evo]

I do not support either, that's why I posted those links. Please don't put words into my mouth.

So then, what is your point in posting those links? Most people would consider their voting records as a positive, not a negative.

 

[BobG]

My dream ticket:
Ron Paul-David Duke 2008

Wow! That makes a McCain-Clinton ticket seem logical.

 

[turbo]

Wow! That makes a McCain-Clinton ticket seem logical.

That even makes a McCain-BILL Clinton ticket look logical!

 

[chemisttree]

I'd like to see an administration in which both 'liberal' and 'conservative' perspectives represented.

Me too! ...as long as it was liberally conservative.

 

[turbo]

We have a problem here. People on both sides of the liberal/conservative divide are driven by self-interest and use these blanket terms to tar one another in terms that the average voter cannot understand. Thus we have people complaining that Obama is a socialist and we've got Republicans saying that McCain is too liberal. Instead of having a dialog on policy and positions, we have senseless blather centered around monolithic dichotomies that DO NOT EXIST.

 

[Astronuc]

The flip side of an Obama-Hagel ticket would be McCain-Leiberman. Clinton on a Republican ticket is just a funny idea.

In order of probability:

1. Obama-Hagel (Hagel supposedly has no political future to worry about, so it's at least possible; Sebelius and Strickland probably rank ahead of him even if he would accept)
2. McCain-Leiberman (nearly no possibility, especially since either Pawlenty or maybe Huckabee will be VP candidate; there are no other possibilities - on the other hand, Leiberman will be 2008's Zell Miller)
3. Kerry-McCain (as floated in 2004 - 0 possibility; it was just something to rile up Republicans)
4. Ron Paul-Ralph Nader
5. Clinton-Gingrich (the nearly 0 chance of Clinton winning the nomination drop this to slightly below zero?)
6. Obama-Limbaugh (Obama owes Limbaugh for releasing the superdelegates to vote for him)
7. O'Reilley-Olbermann (on a third party ticket)
8. McCain-Clinton

But you left out Ross Perot! Or how about Dan Quayle?

How about Victoria Sinclair?!

 

[RonPaul2008]

"So then, what is your point in posting those links? Most people would consider their voting records as a positive, not a negative."

Would you explain your opinion as to how and what about their voting was positive and in any way beneficial to the average working American? In my opinion, they are both socialists who want to continue this perpetual welfare state and interventionist policy; them as well as McCain.

I wanted to point out the socialist voting records of Hilary Clinton and Barack Obama, who both voted for increased spending and more anti-business regulations. Hilary Clinton herself said on national television not too long ago that the oil companies can afford to pay about fifty percent of their windfall profits so that people buying gas at the pump don't have to pay their fair share of tax. She euphemistically refers to it as "the gas tax holiday." It helps you and me, sure, but it's unfair to the oil companies. Why should they or any company be punished for making a legitimate profit? Do you still deny, if elected, Hilary Clinton would enact socialist policies and allow the welfare state to continue? The economic leeches suck hardworking Americans dry. I don't want to pay for an illegal immigrant to have a baby here and pay for her TB shots. I don't want to pay for the welfare of a single mother and children because she doesn't know how to quit having babies. I don't want to pay for foreign aid to people on the other side of the globe. I don't want to pay for elderly who lacked the discipline or foresight to save for retirement. I don't want to invade sovereign nations who are not a threat to Americans. In my opinion, if Hilary Clinton, Barack Obama, or McCain were elected, the status quo would remain the same for another four years, just a little different with each of those three candidates. We'd still be paying taxes for medical care, social security, welfare, and other programs that exploit from me and other taxpayers, and it would not be to our benefit. I don't know about you, but I like to keep most of the money I make. What about you? This forced philanthropy and worldwide intervention policy has got to end one way or another, and that is why I am voting for another revolution by voting for Ron Paul.

 

[Evo]

and that is why I am voting for another evolution by voting for Ron Paul.

You do know he's not being considered as a candidate, right?