![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Hopefully, the interminable nomination season is finally over...
Last night, Denise and I watched the three speeches. My, what a contrast. McCain appeared to be speaking to a bare handful of people somewhere near New Orleans. He spoke before a hideous green backdrop, looking cadaverous and unhealthy against the color (someone on his staff needs to be fired for that choice). His occasional smiles looked frozen and false, his body lurched awkwardly as he turned from side-to-side, and his delivery was wooden. Especially at first, he appeared nervous and uncertain, obviously reading from the teleprompters, though later he seemed to get a bit more comfortable. But it was not an example of good speechmaking: rather, it was a rambling leftover stew of stock talking-points and applause lines.
Then Clinton spoke before a large gathering of loyalists in NYC -- and she gave a speech designed for those loyalists. To her credit, at the beginning of the speech she talked of reunifying the party and coming together, but then she proceeded to defuse such hopes. There was no congratulation of Obama for becoming the putative nominee of the party; instead, there was more touting of the states she's won and her claim to have garnered the majority of the popular vote, and a statement that she intended everyone's vote to count (which started a chant of "Denver! Denver!" among her audience.) In the end, she said that she was emphatically not ending her campaign tonight. Her speech was more a final plea to the superdelegates to reconsider. It was, however, a very well-delivered speech, and she showed that she can rouse her followers, and it demonstrated the depths of loyalty among them.
And finally there was Obama. Oh, my... His speech was given to some 17,000 people in a stadium in St. Paul, with (according to CNN) some several thousand people outside. He began with a statement that he would be the Democratic nominee. Then followed a sequence of praise for his fellow campaigners, and long paean to Clinton for her campaign -- he was far more gracious to her than she had been toward him, though I suppose he could afford to be. Then he began to disassemble McCain's speech, tearing it apart point by point. He delineated what "change" meant to him, and he did so in a rousing, inspiring, and fiery speech that had the crowd literally howling by the end. The man can speak -- in fact, I can think of very few better-delivered speeches. He makes people want to believe him. I can't wait to see Obama and McCain debate; the contrast in styles should be interesting...
So hopefully, it's over except for some final faint shouting. Hopefully, sometime in the next few days, Clinton will make the decision to give a concession speech rather than to pursue the incredibly divisive tactic of taking the ruling for Michigan and Florida to the credentials committee. I will say that I've heard some (few) Clinton supporters (and, for the record, both Denise and I voted for Clinton in Ohio's primary) say that they will vote for McCain rather than Obama... Given the incredible political distance between Clinton and McCain, I can only attribute that to blatant racism: Obama is far, far closer to Clinton's views than McCain's -- how could someone who wanted Clinton to be president vote for someone whose views (on abortion, on health care, on social issues, on foreign policy, on economics, on the conduct of war) are so antithetical to hers? I don't understand that at all unless race is the problem.
Now comes the important point: picking VP candidates. It's especially important, I would contend, for McCain, because given his health and age, there is a greater possibility that the veep might become the president, should McCain win the election.
So who do you think they're going to pick?
Last night, Denise and I watched the three speeches. My, what a contrast. McCain appeared to be speaking to a bare handful of people somewhere near New Orleans. He spoke before a hideous green backdrop, looking cadaverous and unhealthy against the color (someone on his staff needs to be fired for that choice). His occasional smiles looked frozen and false, his body lurched awkwardly as he turned from side-to-side, and his delivery was wooden. Especially at first, he appeared nervous and uncertain, obviously reading from the teleprompters, though later he seemed to get a bit more comfortable. But it was not an example of good speechmaking: rather, it was a rambling leftover stew of stock talking-points and applause lines.
Then Clinton spoke before a large gathering of loyalists in NYC -- and she gave a speech designed for those loyalists. To her credit, at the beginning of the speech she talked of reunifying the party and coming together, but then she proceeded to defuse such hopes. There was no congratulation of Obama for becoming the putative nominee of the party; instead, there was more touting of the states she's won and her claim to have garnered the majority of the popular vote, and a statement that she intended everyone's vote to count (which started a chant of "Denver! Denver!" among her audience.) In the end, she said that she was emphatically not ending her campaign tonight. Her speech was more a final plea to the superdelegates to reconsider. It was, however, a very well-delivered speech, and she showed that she can rouse her followers, and it demonstrated the depths of loyalty among them.
And finally there was Obama. Oh, my... His speech was given to some 17,000 people in a stadium in St. Paul, with (according to CNN) some several thousand people outside. He began with a statement that he would be the Democratic nominee. Then followed a sequence of praise for his fellow campaigners, and long paean to Clinton for her campaign -- he was far more gracious to her than she had been toward him, though I suppose he could afford to be. Then he began to disassemble McCain's speech, tearing it apart point by point. He delineated what "change" meant to him, and he did so in a rousing, inspiring, and fiery speech that had the crowd literally howling by the end. The man can speak -- in fact, I can think of very few better-delivered speeches. He makes people want to believe him. I can't wait to see Obama and McCain debate; the contrast in styles should be interesting...
So hopefully, it's over except for some final faint shouting. Hopefully, sometime in the next few days, Clinton will make the decision to give a concession speech rather than to pursue the incredibly divisive tactic of taking the ruling for Michigan and Florida to the credentials committee. I will say that I've heard some (few) Clinton supporters (and, for the record, both Denise and I voted for Clinton in Ohio's primary) say that they will vote for McCain rather than Obama... Given the incredible political distance between Clinton and McCain, I can only attribute that to blatant racism: Obama is far, far closer to Clinton's views than McCain's -- how could someone who wanted Clinton to be president vote for someone whose views (on abortion, on health care, on social issues, on foreign policy, on economics, on the conduct of war) are so antithetical to hers? I don't understand that at all unless race is the problem.
Now comes the important point: picking VP candidates. It's especially important, I would contend, for McCain, because given his health and age, there is a greater possibility that the veep might become the president, should McCain win the election.
So who do you think they're going to pick?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
From:
veepstakes
The Obama folks evidently have been told that "they'll be sorry if they chose ANY other woman other than Hillary for VP." You're also putting 2 very very strong people together, and they BOTH wanted to be the boss. Hillary will NOT be comfortable being the 2nd banana, especially if the VP in the Obama administration is closer to the 'traditional' role of VP, and not the Prime Minister role that Cheney has turned it into.
Bill Richardson, yes, Kathy Sebelius (KS gov) a much better choice for a female VP, and also helps with the Plains/Western states. There are a bunch of very strong folks available for the Dem VP..
Edwards would be wasted as VP. I want Edwards for Attorney General! That would put a fox among the chickens, for sure...
GOP VP? whoo! Condi Rice, someone else said she would tie McBush even tighter to the Bush administration. I agree. Bobby Jindal? Maybe....
Huckabee and Romney, by their actions/words after the primaries, I think, have disqualified themselves.
From:
Re: veepstakes
From:
Re: veepstakes
I feel dirty just saying it.
Ah well. That's my read at any rate. Again, a safe, military-friendly person is my bet. Sam Nunn, Webb, Clark, Biden, all come to mind. Clark is the best of that group as he has no political history to hold against him. Colin Powell would rock, but we'd see another secession...
McCain may pick Pawlenty-aren't there any rising stars in the Republican ranks anymore?
From:
Re: veepstakes
I would hope you're mistaken about that. But I'm not certain we're going to find out... :-)
From:
Re: veepstakes
I feel dirty just saying it.
And I'd worry about the reaction to a white male -- still a lot of crazy out there that seeing the white guy in the #2 slot could dig up, alas. I'd say his pool is pretty much the likes of Richardson and Sebelius if it doesn't go to Clinton.
From:
Re: veepstakes
From:
Re: veepstakes
Wow that was a sucky metaphor. And in a writer's journal. I'd be mortified, but I already soiled myself earlier.
From:
Re: veepstakes
Yeah. Like I never come up with clumsy metaphors or generally ineffective prose... :-)
From:
Re: veepstakes
And as I said somewhere above, with McCain being elderly and with a history of health issues, you have to give consideration to how you'd like his VP as president.
From:
Re: veepstakes
She won't deliver Kansas for the Dems -- that state will still go Republican. Yes, she has ties to Ohio (her father was the former Governor Gilligan), but Gilligan was neither a popular nor an effective governor of the state, and I suspect she'd actually have a negative effect on Ohio.
From:
Re: veepstakes
Shade in everything to the south and east of that line. That's where Obama is not going to do too well. As the Rittenhousii come from Ross County, I'm very aware of where the negatives are in that end of the state.
From:
Re: veepstakes
Obama *should* ask Edwards first; SUSA polling is showing that he'd clean up with Edwards. If Edwards refuses that, offer him the Attorney General position and tell him to kick butts.
I've met Richardson, and I think that he's a nice guy, and means well, and is far less capable and gaffe-ridden than people realize, looking at his time as a Cabinet guy especially.
I like Sebelius, and all, but I don't see a strong Female Option this time.
The smartest McCain pick would be either Romney or Huckabee, in regard to settling some problems in the party. Both would not be that useful otherwise. All the others are non-entities of various sorts.
An intriguing McCain pick would be the Governor of Alaska...a reformer sort that is a decent campaigner. But I think he'll either go with Jindal or some raving Bushie.
From:
Re: veepstakes
We'll see -- I suspect sometime in late July or August, in both cases.