Obama/Biden: The dream ticket or just a bad dream?

Delaware Senator Joe Biden is now the official vice presidential pick for presidential hopeful Barrack Obama. While thousands of Democratic activists and “insider wannabes” were still waiting for that exciting “I’ll get to know first” text message the news was leaked late Friday night with the official announcement coming on Saturday morning.

So what have we learned from this pick?

*John McCain is a lucky man.

*The Obama camp was less worried about a creative electoral vote choice, or one based on gender to solidify the white women vote than they were about their nominee looking amateurish and unprepared when it came to national security and foreign affairs. That is very telling.

*That Obama's dream of cleaning up Washington and throwing out all the bums begins with recruiting as his veep an entrenched, career Washington politician whose son is a lobbyist. . Hmmmm...all talk and no walk. So much for 'change'.

*Delaware in now firmly in the blue state category.

*Hillary will probably start her bitter "I told you so" Superdelegate tour sometime tomorrow.

*This move leaves the door open for McCain to choose from a wide variety of options for his vice presidential choice. There are a number of electoral-based candidates that are now even more attractive (Tom Ridge or the governor of Minnesota for example) and it leaves the door open for a good woman veep that would help cancel out the minority novelty factor of Obama and provide an added appeal to more moderate soccer mom types and rejected Hillary supporters that may be the deciding factor in this tightening race.

*Obama's own running mate is on record stating that Obama is not ready to serve as president (not once, but twice. The latest in August of 2007).

*Biden is an endless gaffe machine and will provide endless questionable and controversial soundbites before it is all said and done.

*Apparently this quote about Obama really paid off in the end. “I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean, that’s a storybook, man.” - Joe Biden

*It confirmed what I've been saying all along. There was no frickin' way this was going to be Hillary. Obama is the first to slay a Clinton in a long time and there was no way he was going to let one back into the white house.

*Releasing this at about 1 am Eastern Standard Time was really, really, odd.

*It will be only a matter of days before someone comes up with some inventive Obama bin Biden bumper sticker.

*This was a 'safe pick' showing little risk or creative ingenuity in the search and selection of the Democratic vice presidential candidate. In the end and despite the hype, this probably won't matter too much anyway one way or another. This selection will alienate as many voters as it may have brought with it. Biden is a arrogant windbag that will probably only be used as an attack dog between now and November.

*Remember when Dole picked Kemp? Obama isn't learning from history. Biden brings virtually nothing to the ticket besides not being a huge negative.

*The media is now officially a pathetic, childlike entity who would gush and blush if Obama picked Hamburglar as his running mate. Have they no shame?

*Some are still hoping that there is still a possibility that this is some sort of trial balloon or sinister plot by Hillary to take out the prince before he would become king. They are wrong.

*Mark Levin is not Joe Biden's friend. He refers to Biden as "the stupidist man in the United States Senate". I can safely foretell that there will be no slumber party sleepovers in the Lincoln bedroom for Mr. Levin in the event of an Obama victory.

*Rumor has it that MSNBC had Olbermann on the phone, in his jammies, saying that the timing was perfect and that the convention will start with a big exciting explosion. Good grief.

A look at things to come:

I really hope it’s Biden. You don’t want to say that too loud, but I really do hope that it’s Joe Biden, because we’ve got mountains of archival audio on Joe Biden. Plus, the arrogance factor times two. Biden and the Messiah would just be delicious.
- Rush Limbaugh on Wednesday the 20th.

Lastly, I leave you with some wise words from the newly picked Democratic vice presidential candidate.

”Obama isn’t ready to be President and the job is not something that lends itself to on-the-job training.”
-Joe Biden
"The only guy on the other side who’s qualified is John McCain.”
- Joe Biden

The next month should be very interesting for the political junkie as the Democratic National Convention starts on Monday, followed closely by McCain's vp pick and then the Republican National Convention begins on September 1st.

Posted by David M. Huntwork at August 24, 2008 2:10 AM
Comments
Comment #259343

yaaaaaaaawn!

Yet another neo-con post filled not with observations about the nuts-and-bolts issues that affect the everyday lives of Americans, but just more scorn and spite.

Recognizing that scorn and spite and near-constant fear-mongering for what it was is part of helped me to wake up and get away from the Republican party.

Mr. Huntwork, I admit I send my share of slings and arrows of outrageous commentary towards the red side of the page…but at least I try to back up what I say with hard facts from good references. I don’t always succeed, but I do try. I recommend we all try to do the same.

Posted by: Glenn Contrarian at August 24, 2008 3:23 AM
Comment #259347

Gee, He didn’t do anything right? Man, you are tough. How many Sunni’s are living in McCain’s house? I mean Shia. I mean houses? I mean…..
oh dear I forgot the way home.
Did I take my euchanasia today?

Posted by: googlumpugus at August 24, 2008 7:48 AM
Comment #259357

Rush limbaugh? You’re quoting rush limbaugh? Isn’t he the pill popper who got caught flying to “hooker heaven” in the d.r. with that baggy of Viagra. His quote on his radio show when he got back: “I had a great time in the Dominican Republic, I wish I could tell you about it.” This is the source you choose to use to criticize Barack Obama and Joe Biden?
David, the republican party has so much to be ashamed for.
Why would you want to add to it?

Posted by: Charles Ross at August 24, 2008 11:17 AM
Comment #259364

The “Bad Dream” has been eight years of Bush/Cheney/ Neocon rule. And McCain is just more of McSAME.

Posted by: Veritas Vincit at August 24, 2008 12:22 PM
Comment #259368

I still maintain that the degree of nastiness rises with the degree of fear, and these current Rep/Conservative posts seem to comfirm that.
I’m looking forward to regaining a position of respect in the rest of the world and a reason to show pride in the intelligence and wisdom of our leaders. I feel good that we’ve found a great combination with the abilities to do that!

Posted by: janedoe at August 24, 2008 12:47 PM
Comment #259370

I very much like Biden but choosing Hilary Clinton would have just about guaranteed a Democratic victory in November (and assured the nation of competent governance, something we’ve sadly lacked over the last eight years. ( Is that even open to debate?)) Now it’s McCain’s turn. He has to be considering the vice-presidential debates and who would be able to stand up against Joe Biden. Tim Pawlenty? You’ve got to be kidding. Jindal? It’s difficult to imagine that. How about Romney? Better, except for the suggestion during the campaign that Romney was a “phony”. It doesn’t get more personal than that. A pro-choice pick? Lieberman, Ridge? I can’t think of a bigger tactical mistake that could be made. I think McCain is rather boxed in here.

Posted by: charles Ross at August 24, 2008 12:59 PM
Comment #259377

I think McCain is in a good position right now. It’s always nice to let the other guys go first when choosing running mates. Biden is a fine choice.

As a Republican I think is his sort of neutral. He proves Obama isn’t ready to be CIC. It’s sort of like a short man buying a big pickup. People “were” “maybe” thinking things, but now you just confirmed that you are thinking those same things. It shows the Obama campaign like the rest of the country is concerned about his experience for CIC.

Biden will make the race even more interesting. Wow is there a great deal of material out there!! He is famous for Gaffe’s. I certainly don’t believe republicans should fear a candidate that has showed so poorly in Presidential politics.

Al that said, I do like Joe Biden. He is a strong family man with a tragic life story. I understand he is among the poorest US Senators. He seems like a genuine person.

He has been very wrong about Iraq in the last 12 months but what democrat hasn’t?

Posted by: Craig Holmes at August 24, 2008 1:58 PM
Comment #259382

One name I forgot is Colin Powell. He would be an enormous asset to John McCain, in spite of his, now infamous, U.N. speech. Both McCain and Powell would provide a strong challenge to the Democrats. Powell might even slice off a few percentage points of the the black vote in November. The problem here is that Powell has not only not endorsed John McCain, he has not even endorsed the Republican Party (who can blame him) and has even left open the door of endorsing Obama.
Re: Democrats being wrong about Iraq. Our adventure in Iraq has been a failure. I’m talking about the failure to provide for OUR interests, the national interests of the United States. We have spent far more in blood and treasure then could ever be realized by the success of the surge. I say this with sadness because w had it going in late ‘02 and early ‘03 with the re-insertion of the inspectors and the buildup of troops, the threat was putting enormous pressure on the Iraqi government. I could have seen, with capable, nimble leadership on our side, that we could have eased Saddam out of power and created a better situation over there.
Right now, Sec. Rice is helping negotiate a fixed timetable for withdrawal from Iraq. This is pretty much what the Democrats have been arguing for. Should she succeed it would undermine the message that Republicans have been pushing that timetables aid the enemy. It would leave McCain without a positive message on Iraq, IMO.

Posted by: charles Ross at August 24, 2008 2:56 PM
Comment #259390

JMcC needs Romney more than anyone else, because it will ensure loyalty of the LDS in western states and elsewhere. BHO’s pick doesn’t really do anything except guarantee him those all important 3 electoral votes from DE.

Posted by: ohrealy at August 24, 2008 4:26 PM
Comment #259396

I don’t care about Presidents anymore. Look at the new forms of democracy that are forming on the internet.

Posted by: Sandy at August 24, 2008 5:15 PM
Comment #259397

David M

It really would not matter what candidate Obama picked. You folks would have been prepared with your pages of vindictive fodder to exhibit your weak stances. What you have presented here resembles little more than a conservative version of the National Enquirer. You folks really don’t have anything of substance to attack with do you. It must be difficult having nothing more than false creations of negative spin to make your case.

Posted by: RickIL at August 24, 2008 5:22 PM
Comment #259399

I was reading the comments and just waiting to say that at least the Repugs are no longer calling Barak Hussein anymore. And then lo and behold, someone just could not hold back anymore and used the three initials. Tsk tsk. You guys are certain now aren’t you that you are gonna lose. Or more likely, you’re hoping you’re gonna lose, cause surely no one could really want Grampa Munster in there, even for four years.

Posted by: ray at August 24, 2008 5:42 PM
Comment #259405
*The Obama camp was less worried about a creative electoral vote choice, or one based on gender to solidify the white women vote than they were about their nominee looking amateurish and unprepared when it came to national security and foreign affairs. That is very telling.

I think choosing Biden is something you do when you want more than the appearance of such expertise at your side, but the reality of it as well.

McCain’s long foreign policy experience has him confusing Sunni for Shia, Iran for al-Qaeda, Czechoslovakia for the Czech Republic, and has him hiring a fellow for his foreign policy crew who lobbied for the Georgian government, who were the idiots who trusted Bush and McCain to come to the rescue should he make his move.

McCain does things bad enough by backing Bush’s play. I don’t think things get much better when we aid failures all his own to the mix

So, I think the more accurate to say it is that with Obama and Biden, you get real change and real experience together in one package, where with McCain you get no real change, and somebody who’s learned relatively little from the lessons experience has taught him.

*That Obama’s dream of cleaning up Washington and throwing out all the bums begins with recruiting as his veep an entrenched, career Washington politician whose son is a lobbyist. . Hmmmm…all talk and no walk. So much for ‘change’.

Obama’s the driver, Biden’s the passenger. Biden reads the map, but Obama decides where to go.

On the subject of Delaware, it hasn’t gone red in twenty years.

*This move leaves the door open for McCain to choose from a wide variety of options for his vice presidential choice. There are a number of electoral-based candidates that are now even more attractive (Tom Ridge or the governor of Michigan for example) and it leaves the door open for a good woman veep that would help cancel out the minority novelty factor of Obama and provide an added appeal to more moderate soccer mom types and rejected Hillary supporters that may be the deciding factor in this tightening race.

The complexity of Obama’s selection is nothing compared to McCain’s. McCain has to juggle the theocrats, the Wall Street Republicans, the independents. He could go for Mitt Romney, but might find himself taking more flak for his economic elitism problem. Biden didn’t please anybody, but whoever McCain picks could either blow things to pieces, or bore people to tears.

Really, I don’t think Democrats need advice from this current crop of Republicans on how to handle an election.

After all, we did much better than them last time. Maybe they should look to us for some advice.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at August 24, 2008 7:51 PM
Comment #259406

Ah, the Delaware line was a joke. Liberals just don’t ‘get it’ sometimes. And despite the snarkiness and attitude, the fact that no one really is disputing the specifics of this post is telling, because they are true and though I hated to be the one to point them out, it had to be said.

Posted by: David M. Huntwork at August 24, 2008 8:08 PM
Comment #259409

RickL:

Come on. You guys nominate a great orator with no national experience, a freshman senator in a time of war, and then cry foul when it’s pointed out to you.

Oh, the most liberal person in the US Senate.

YOu are the ones drinking the koolaid.

Posted by: Craig Holmes at August 24, 2008 9:49 PM
Comment #259411

There are lots and lots of polls between here and November. However the first one out, as reported on CNN shows a negative Biden bounce:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/24/election.2008.poll/index.html

They have the race tied!!!

It will be interesting to see where we are a week from today. I expected a European bounce that didn’t happen. I wonder if we will still be tied in seven days?

Posted by: Craig Holmes at August 24, 2008 9:53 PM
Comment #259412

Craig

No one is denying what David posted here. However what is missing puts much of what he displayed in proper perspective. He failed to supply the original context in which they were used. It is those vague generalities that are used to mislead or create notions that are not entirely valid. Supplying the entire context often paints an entirely different picture or understanding of a situation than what one is attempting to present. It is deceptive practice generally used by those who have no real substance of their own to validate a point. Much like Obama’s opponent.

Posted by: RickIL at August 24, 2008 10:28 PM
Comment #259414

Craig,

Which War? I thought the mission was accomplished.

Posted by: googlumpugus at August 24, 2008 10:53 PM
Comment #259416

googlumpugus:

Afghanistan and Iraq.

RickL:

As long as you don’t get self righteous about it and all.

I remember McCain’s opponent misrepresenting a 100 years comment for a very long time even after being called on it. So just so you don’t try to imply on side is more righteous than the other.

Posted by: Craig Holmes at August 24, 2008 11:02 PM
Comment #259421

Craig -

Gee, look where that VAST amount of experience got us with Bush/Cheney!

“Deficits don’t matter.”
Dick Cheney, one of the most experienced men in Washington.

Look - experience DOES help, but it’s NO good without good JUDGMENT…which your guys have NOT shown (and which is why we’re pouring $10+B down the Iraq drain every single month.

If you’ll examine HISTORY, that’s what you’ll find - FDR had a VAST amount of experience, and he took us through the Depression and WWII…and the challenges he faced and overcame were only overshadowed by those faced by Lincoln…whose experience was just about equal to Obama’s.

Experience does help - but JUDGMENT is essential.

And your guys ain’t got that.

Posted by: Glenn Contrarian at August 25, 2008 1:52 AM
Comment #259426

Craig,

So the surge didn’t work? and the mission isn’t accomplished?

Posted by: googlumpugus at August 25, 2008 2:54 AM
Comment #259429

Rasmussen poll shows it differently…..

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

Posted by: janedoe at August 25, 2008 4:38 AM
Comment #259432

Craig

So just so you don’t try to imply on side is more righteous than the other.

Seriously Craig, given the nature of our legislators and executive branch to vigorously pursue self serving agendas I don’t believe righteousness and its association with politics can be considered a valid descriptive for any party.

As an example, the right have fervently worked to build a perception of righteousness. A false perception used to dupe the evangelical crowd into believing they are the party that best represents evangelical ideology. They pursue a group of people who rely on faith not proven fact to substantiate and validate their very being. They ask them to put that faith in conservative republican values. Values they preach and ascribe to but in reality fail to practice. Faith is a good thing, so long as it does not mask reality or good judgment. To continue to show faith in an organization which time and again deceptively preys on ones gull abilities does not show good judgment. To deceptively use those claims of virtuosity to lure a certain crowd is anything but righteous.

On the other hand the dems have historically been the party that more clearly represents the working people of this nation. In that regard they can imo lay claim to a tiny degree of righteousness.

Posted by: RickIL at August 25, 2008 9:27 AM
Comment #259448

David M. Huntwork-
There really aren’t that many true specifics in your post. I started going point by point, but all you had were just opinions, and I felt I could handle most of what you said with a few short paragraphs.

There really isn’t much meat in this criticism, but my instincts tell me substance isn’t the point of this exercise among the Republican talking points author. The point is to create, by constant and relentless criticism, the feeling that the Democrats can’t do anything right.

Fortunately for us, we have a far more potent weapon on our side: the reality that Republicans haven’t done much right. Though the perception of a reality, and a perception created by rhetoric seem little different to an uninformed person, there is a significant difference. When I claim that this administration has been waging this war for longer than WWII, that’s a real fact that people can check and see is right. When I say that the Rezko investigation, despite all the claims of upcoming revelations, has not implicated Obama in any corrupt behavior, that is a fact. So is the fact that Obama went before two hometown newspapers, took grilling for 90 Minutes, refused no questions, and satisfied those papers that he was not involved in the corruption surrounding his friend.

You can check this out for yourself. McCain, we find out has multiple lobbyists working for his campaign, running it, in fact. The Republicans spin it this way and that, but that’s what’s true. In the earlier part of the campaign, Charlie Black was even running his lobbying firm out of the back of the Straight Talk Express.

That, also, is a checkable fact. Maybe these are “nice” lobbyists, turning against their own kind. But where’s the evidence of that?

As for the whole Liberal Media thing? This is your liberal media at work. The relationship seems a bit cozy. McCain has had plenty of people covering for his each and every mess-up. The facts, though, are what bring the negatives against him. He has supported Bush 95% of the time, and Bush’s policies aren’t popular. The Republican politicians use the Liberal Media Canard as a way to raise the credulity and lower the skepticism of their constituents. It’s no different here. The GOP does not want people looking closely at McCain for what he is.

Craig Holmes-
He’s better than an orator. Clinton is a great orater, a charismatic politician. But he wasn’t a party builder or a party booster as president. He essentially split the difference between the Republicans and the Democrats, and did little to expand the party in any real way.

Obama is a party-builder. Before his campaign, he was supporting Democratic candidates during the 2006, and I don’t just mean moral support. He’s been helping them with funding, and with organization on their behalf.

Now, even while he runs a tough campaign, he’s been building party infrastructure in just about every state, and challenging McCain beyond the traditional battleground states.

Now you can talk about polls, but here’s my perspective. The tracking polls are going to take three or four days to absorb the news, and even then, you ought to wait until after the convention to form any solid impressions, so next week should be the best point to judge the full effect of recent events.

But even so, the tracking polls are taking a national view of a state by state election. Also, many of the cited polls are likely voter polls, which adjust results for who they think will show up. In a registered voter poll, Obama is up by six points.

You should read further: Obama is not a weak candidate in comparison.

Though McCain Rates better on general foreign affairs, on Iraq and Georgia specifically, Obama’s even with him.

Obama leads on the economy. He leads on Optimism by two to one. He has a 21 point advantage on people’s belief that he will stand up to special interests. He is seen by twelve points as the more bipartisan of the two.

He even has a slight edge as the stronger leaders, and is seen as more empathetic and in touch with voters. 64 percent see Obama as issue focused, and 48 percent see McCain as being on the negative attack.

Independents split between them, and both are seen as favorable by 59%. This is roughly equivalent to the overall registered voters.

But as for enthusiasm, only 28% of McCain’s voters are very enthusiastic, to Obama’s 52%.

Obama is not a weak candidate. That’s just trash talk, and Obama has been trash-talked through the campaign without being taken out.

McCain is riding high on past goodwill. The more negative he gets, the more brutal he gets, the more he risks undermining that goodwill, that feeling that he is above the Republican’s nasty past on negative campaigning. Obama can keep on being the dignified, cool-headed customer he’s been and gain points both for being strong under pressure, and a leader on positive politics.

Obama has the better position to win from.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at August 25, 2008 11:45 AM
Comment #259457

Dude should do some fact checking before posting articles of this sort, blasting one candidate as essentially stupid for picking a veep running mate while the very suggestions he makes for his man’s running mate are… well… more than a little silly.

And I quote our esteemed author:

This move leaves the door open for McCain to choose from a wide variety of options for his vice presidential choice. There are a number of electoral-based candidates that are now even more attractive (Tom Ridge or the governor of Michigan for example)

Mr. Huntwork may or may not be aware that Michigan’s Democratic governor, Jennifer Granholm, endorsed Barack Obama for president way back on June 7.

If he was aware of this before writing this amateur article, maybe he’s going for the crossover vote? Interesting, but I don’t think you want you running mate endorsing the other candidate.

If he wasn’t aware… well… like I side… dude should check his facts.

Posted by: Doug Langworthy at August 25, 2008 12:38 PM
Comment #259459

And another thing… why all the rancor about choosing someone from an already-blue, 3 electoral vote state? All the neo-cons are chiding Obama for picking someone who will make sure that ‘Delaware is now firmly in the blue state category.’

Y’all mean like your man Bush, in 2000, did when he picked a running mate from the electoral-rich state of Wyoming? Also a state that was already firmly in the red camp? Or did Bush pick someone whom he thought had tangible Washington experience who could help him navigate the intricacies of that city?

As a firm independent, I can objectively say that y’all are just lobbing shots simply for the sake of lobbing shots. You need to figure out that you are shooting mindless blanks…

Posted by: Doug Langworthy at August 25, 2008 12:51 PM
Comment #259461

Stephen:

Obama has the better position to win from.

I think that is beyond dispute. The story is that Obama isn’t winning. He is tied. The reason he is tied is because you nominated a weak candidate.

In a year when you had everything in your favor, you are tied going into your convention.

Posted by: Craig Holmes at August 25, 2008 1:11 PM
Comment #259474

I’ve just read an article where Maggie Thatcher’s relatives have confirmed her dementia. The question remains when will McCain’s people admit it? I guess he really is like Reagan.

Posted by: googlumpugus at August 25, 2008 2:42 PM
Comment #259475

I suppose to some that could be a claim to fame…….running for POTUS while in the initial throes of Alzheimers’. He can cite that the list is short and selective.

Posted by: janedoe at August 25, 2008 2:55 PM
Comment #259503

oooooh baby. Are the Democrats in trouble? The press is mostly about Hillary and two polls have the race tied!! A negative VP bounce?

Maybe Kennedy can straighten the convention out before it gets out of control.

Posted by: Craig Holmes at August 25, 2008 6:03 PM
Comment #259669

Obama’s numbers went down. America wasn’t impressed with his pick.

A Washington insider. A man who plainly declared that Obama is not ready for the White House. A man who plainly declared that McCain would make a better president than Obama. And at a time when women are angry at how Hillary was handled….he chose to not let a woman be Vice President but rather to go with Biden to try and recover from the “experience” problem he has.

It was a lousy choice. Now, if McCain picks a woman….that alone in a tight election could swing it McCains way. Why? Because 51% of America (women) would like to see a woman in the Whitehouse. And just like blacks flocking to Obama….women may flock to the woman.

Obama blew it.

Posted by: Stephen L at August 27, 2008 1:34 AM
Post a comment