MyDD :: No really, Sebelius CANNOT be VP (this is not snark.)

No really, Sebelius CANNOT be VP (this is not snark.)

by Lakrosse, Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:21:48 PM EST

So right now, the veepstakes are going on, the names are floating, and Kathleen Sebelius, governor of Kansas is a commonly floated one around. She's got all the makings of a non-VP. Lets explore them:

1. She has no constituency or any type of one outside Kansas. All politics is local. The fact that she got elected as a Democrat in perpetually red Kansas is no accomplishment and testament to that. She played the politics game, being against abortion and gay rights to get where she is. The region she is from, Kansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma are not areas from where we are likely to receive electoral votes. The fact her dad was governor of Ohio is not gonna help there, as he wasn't terribly popular there, getting defeated for a second term in both his house and governor bids, and being there a long time ago without even the Sebelius namesake.

2. She has very little experience being involved with big time politics, being governor since 2003, being gov only 2 years longer than Obama has been a senator, and shorter than Hillary has been a senator, or Evan Bayh has been a senator. Experience is Obama's weak point, and Sebelius would emphasize this perceived shortcoming.

3. She is boring and uncharismatic, and inspires no energy in the party. Her SOTU response exemplified this. It wasn't some long convention speech that happened 4 years prior to the election year, this only happened 8 months ago. Her speaking style is bland in the mold of John Kerry, and she even looks like John Kerry, and this hurt a lot on the stump. She stops all of Obama's energy.

4. She does not bring any demographic group with her, as she has not shown any popularity with working class whites, or older voters that would be in swing states Dems can carry. Sure, she won in Kansas, but did so by being essentially a Republican with a D next to her name. But if she were on the Obama ticket, she'd have to become a real D who supports gay rights and abortion. As a real Democrat, she has no base with older voters or working class white ones, whereas Kaine, Clinton, Bayh have been elected in states that can vote Democrat, and ran as Democrats.

5. Being that she is not a known name or entity, the headline would be "a black and a woman." That does not sound good, considering how hard a time Obama may have because of his color, and how hard a time he has ahead. Of course, if he had a name brand woman everyone knows, it would be OK as it would be "Obama and (a woman everyone knows)." Sebelius is pretty unknown right now, and would be in the former camp.

6. Putting her on the ticket would be perceived to be only putting her on the ticket to put a woman on the ticket, and seen possibly as an attempt to get Hillary Clinton and Hillary type voters, which yells out "you Hillary voters only voted for her because she was a woman, which is why you'll LOVE Sebelius." This would be amplified by the fact that she brings nothing real to the ticket for the reasons I listed above. She is much less qualified in experience being that Hillary has been involved with politics since being on the Watergate hearing in the '70s, being an active first lady for 12 years while being a high powered lawyer and headed Arkansas's education revitalization effort with great political risk and eventual success, and as First Lady of the US, Hillary attempted to fix one of the US' biggest problems in spite of politics risks and powerful lobbyists and Republicans, lobbyed hard for SCHIP, and was exposed to the day-to-day workings of the White House, living with a President as an active first lady for 8 years, and has been Senator since 2001, being on the Armed Services Committee, all of this in contast to Sebelius has been Governor of Kansas since 2003. 30 years vs. 5 years. That is why putting Sebelius would be seen as a politically expedient snub, that would open the door to Republicans putting Fiorina or someone like that on the ticket.

She is not a contender, and would be a disaster on the ticket. I think its time to put Sebelius as VP speculation to an end.

Poll

Votes: 40
Results : Vote Link : Polls

Tags: kathleen sebelius, Obama, veepstakes (all tags)

Permalink :: 125 Comments :: Post a Comment

Thanks for the concern (1.50 / 2)

but excuse us Obama is busy winning an election

by hocuspocus on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:23:50 PM EST

The diarist is making (2.00 / 3)

some points worth discussing and your comment is dismissive and unproductive.

by Radiowalla on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 06:38:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The diarist is making (none / 0)

There are no points worth discussing in this diary.

It's just the usual sour grapes from Hillary supporters. Yawn.

by Lance Bryce on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 08:32:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

It's Obama's choice. To lose the election. (1.50 / 6)

Obama won the nomination. Get over it. If he wants to lose the General Election, it's his choice. The party can't force him to pick any v.p. He can pick a Republican, or an anti-choice anti-gay Democrat.

If he wants to lose the election it's up to Obama.

by catfish2 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:25:36 PM EST

Re: It's Obama's choice. To lose the election. (2.00 / 1)

Geeze Catfish...
the Gov. of Kansas is...ah none of these...
(unless you can link otherwise)
and..of course this IS about the Gov. of Kansas....

"harlequin speech of suicide, demanding instantaneous lobotomy"

by nogo postal on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:38:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

She's a token (1.00 / 6)

Hillary got more votes than Obama in three out of four of CNN's tallying methods.

Obama needs national security cred, and his Shprockets speech in Berlin didn't cut it. Sebelius does not shore up his national security cred. She's a token.

by catfish2 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:41:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Bill Richardson does! (none / 0)

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:42:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

And you're a sexist. (2.00 / 1)

She's a two-term Democratic governor in a deep red state.

She is qualified, your attempt to marginalize her based on her ovaries notwithstanding.

by Geekesque on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:47:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: She's a token (none / 0)

If Sebelius is a token, then Hillary is the wife of a President running on his name....

by Lance Bryce on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 08:34:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Hillary has qualifications and 18 million votes, (none / 0)

Sebelius has neither. And if you trash the Clintons the way you do, you're no Democrat.

by Lakrosse on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:15:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

In two minutes (2.00 / 0)

I'm going to shit out a diary as to why Hillary Clinton shouldn't be the running mate.

Also;

"Sure, she won in Kansas, but did so by being essentially a Republican with a D next to her name"

That is a LIE. She is not any more conservative than Hillary Clinton.

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:26:59 PM EST

With bated breathe we await your insight (2.00 / 2)

you've shown yourself to be so absorbant of other points of view.

by catfish2 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:41:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Once again (none / 0)

pot, kettle, black.

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:43:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No really, Sebelius CANNOT be VP (2.00 / 1)

I. do. not. give. a. shit. who. Obama. picks.

I am tired of double- and triple-analyzing every possible pick. Enough already.

by rfahey22 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:28:35 PM EST

It's the die hards (2.00 / 1)

last chance to blackmail him into forcing Hillary onto the ticket, against either of their wills.

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:30:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You are PUMA (no snark) (2.00 / 1)

By now.. you of all people should know how we treat you PUMA's

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lF2erYQWI Os

"harlequin speech of suicide, demanding instantaneous lobotomy"

by nogo postal on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:29:59 PM EST

interesting points (none / 0)

I took the time to read it because you took the time to write it.

but this is priceless

"considering how hard a time Obama may have because of his color, and how hard a time he has ahead."

I think he can figure this out on his own.

"They are ever so much nicer at Tiffany's!"

by epiphany on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:30:19 PM EST

Re: not snark.) (2.00 / 2)

I'm sorry....but Obama can't just choose his own VP with the primary race having been so close and Obama/Hillary being almost even in delegates. This is no normal race or convention. A VP has to be voted on the floor by the delegates. Obama can nominate someone..but they have to be approved. With Hillary controlling half the delegates..i don't see how he can't choose her for VP. If he tries to force anyone else down the throats of 2000 delegates the convention could get ugly. Walkouts, riots, fruit thrown on stage, boos? It's a definite possibility. I don't think Kaine wants to stand in front of 2000 Hillary Delegates and say he's a better VP than Hillary. It's gonna get nasty.

by karajan72 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:30:51 PM EST

Is your comment snark? n/t (none / 0)

by Geekesque on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:31:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is your comment snark? n/t (none / 0)

"It's a definite possibility."

by KLRinLA on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:39:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Thought so, but sadly (2.00 / 1)

one needs to ask nowadays.

by Geekesque on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:41:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thought so, but sadly (none / 0)

Actaully, I don't think it was, I was just making fun of the use of "definite possiblity", which sounds odd to me or duplicative/redundant, similar to "very unique".

I've seen some other doozies around today, so no your snark detector is not broken, it's just a little hazy/murky out here today.

by KLRinLA on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:58:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Boy are you off (2.00 / 1)

There aren't enough Hillary dead enders to force her onto the ticket. The delegates will respect whoever Obama chooses because he's the nominee. They are NOT going to force her onto the ticket.

Nice try though. I know you'd love to see Obama embarrassed in front of the convention, but it ain't going to happen. Hillary won't let it.

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:33:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Boy are you off (1.00 / 1)

I don't care if he's embarrassed at the convention or not. I'm just saying that you are expecting Hillary's delegates to just sit down, shut up, roll over, play dead and do whatever Obama wants at the convention. That's not realistic nor should it be. Delegates go to a convention to choose a nominee and fight for who they believe in. According to Obama's supporters and some in the Dem Leadership, Hillary's delegates might as well not even show up. Hillary's voters don't mean anything.

by karajan72 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:39:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Boy are you off (2.00 / 2)

The losing faction does not get to make demands. They are entitled to respect. They should be consulted. They should be honored.

They do not get to make demands. It does not work that way and it basically never has.

by Reaper0Bot0 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:41:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Boy are you off (1.50 / 2)

I'm sorry..but when you control half the delegates at a convention you do get to make demands.

by karajan72 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:43:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

No, you don't (2.00 / 1)

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:43:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No, you don't (1.00 / 1)

you obviously don't understand the point of primaries or how delegates and conventions work.

by karajan72 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:45:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I do (2.00 / 4)

you don't...many of her superdelegates, including ALL OF THEM in New York have gone to Obama. The delegate race is no longer tied anymore and I haven't heard of a vast amount of delegates who are stating they will force her on the ticket. She does not wish to make demands and force herself on the ticket and her delegates are going to respect those wishes.

Look, I'm sorry you're standing alone in this "let's force Hillary on the ticket" project, but that's how it is. Perhaps if you respect your candidate's wishes...

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:50:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Clinton controls delegates, the (2.00 / 1)

nutjob Pumas don't.

Clinton has conceded and is backing Obama 100%, so it doesn't matter one ounce of fly feces what you demand.

by Geekesque on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:45:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton controls delegates, the (1.00 / 1)

It will matter if someone like Diane Feinstein or another powerful Democratic Politician gets on stage and nominates Hillary for Vice President. I think Hillary wants the job. It's going to be tough for Obama to convine the super delegates that they have to vote against Hillary twice.

by karajan72 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:49:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton controls delegates, the (2.00 / 1)

keep living in fantasy land, you know full well the odds of that happening is near zero percent so why would you even bring this up?

by hocuspocus on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:51:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Except Feinstein (2.00 / 1)

won't do that and has made no indication that she will.

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:51:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton controls delegates, the (1.00 / 1)

There is no one Obama can choose for VP that is more deserving to be on the ticket than Hillary Clinton. Everyone knows that. The Super delegates know that. Obama can try to put someone other than Hillary on the ticket..but if he does he probably won't win women over 40 or break 80% with Democrats nationwide.

by karajan72 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:52:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

says who? (2.00 / 1)

you? Please. Women are not going to, en masse, vote for McCain or stay home because Hillary isn't on the ticket. they definitely won't do it if another woman is on the ticket.

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:53:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton controls delegates, the (none / 0)

Entitlement complex yet again. Whatever. Get over it. Clinton lost.

She wasn't "deserving" of anything more than a chance at the nomination, which she had same as everyone.

by Aris Katsaris2 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 06:30:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton controls delegates, the (none / 0)

"There is no one Obama can choose for VP that is more deserving to be on the ticket than Hillary Clinton."

Uh...considering that Hillary lost the primary partly because of the inevitably meme, you might want to stop using language like she "deserves" the VP slot. No one "deserves" it. It's a question of who helps Obama win the election. If Hillary is the most helpful, it should be her. If someone else is the most helpful, it should be them.

by ProgressiveDL on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 06:46:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton controls delegates, the (none / 0)

There is no one Obama can choose for VP that is more deserving to be on the ticket than Hillary Clinton.

This is your argument. Maybe. I don't happen to buy it. But keep arguing it if you think it helps.

Everyone knows that. The Super delegates know that.

This, however, is you pretending that something you believe is what everybody believes. Like it's a "fact."

This little thread was originally about your contention that there's a "definite possibility" that the SD's will revolt if Clinton isn't chosen. What do you think the odds of that happening are? Like 1%? I'd really like to know.

What is The October Protocol?

by Koan on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 07:13:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton controls delegates, the (1.00 / 1)

The choice does not really come down to who "deserves" to be on the ticket more than others. It is who can work with Obama to create a campaign that will bring in voters without turning off other voters. Hillary, for all her good points, is a negative unifying force
for Republicans, and you will get more strident support for McCain if you nominate Hillary.
The campaign will be distracted as the Republicans dig up all the old "health care" comments, drawing attention away from Obama's
plan, and they inevitably bring up the
Whitewater investigation as well. It doesn't matter that it was an accusation that had no basis in reality, because many Americans never
realized that. You REALLY REALLY don't want to
have the campaign going through all that after he
nominates his VP and they are hoping for a bounce. I remember the Whitewater idiocy well, and it played out across the newspapers for a long time. It would be shooting himself in the foot, no matter how deserving she is. On the other hand, if he is elected, there's a very high chance she could end up on the Supreme Court, which would be good for all of us.

SMH

by bigcatlover on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 08:25:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Might not even show up? (none / 0)

what world are you living in and can I have some of what you're smoking?

Obama is the head of the party now, so yeah, they'll do whatever he wants. If she had one, he'd do what she wants. That's how it works. Get over it.

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:41:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Um, Clinton dropped out. (2.00 / 1)

Lots of her superdelegates have endorsed Obama.

There will be no convention fight. The floor vote will be a staged show for public relations purposes.

by Geekesque on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:44:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: not snark.) (none / 0)

Has to?

You have got to be kidding.

And the vast, vast majority of delegates have ZERO interest in stirring up a storm. They want to clap and listen to speeches and network and go to parties and then go back home and organize and win elections.

We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.

by politicsmatters on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:33:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: not snark.) (none / 0)

I'm sorry but he can fucking pick anyone he damn well pleases. Here in America we don't take threats from losers still hung up on a primary election. I just want to see you guys try and disrupt the convention it will pure bliss to see you have your asses handed to you.

by hocuspocus on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:35:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Asses Handed to them (none / 0)

by Hillary Clinton.

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:36:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Asses Handed to them (none / 0)

Please, the Clintons are an afterthought. The DNC and the Democratic party is lead by Obama and his supporters.

by hocuspocus on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:39:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Clinton is still a party leader. (2.00 / 1)

She has an important role to play.

by Geekesque on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:44:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton is still a party leader. (2.00 / 1)

Not in an Obama administration

by hocuspocus on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:46:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

For starters (none / 0)

she'll stand up in front of the convention and endorse Obama.

and if he picks Sebelius, she'll stand up and say how proud she is that the next Vice President will be a woman.

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:48:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: not snark.) (none / 0)

ah...
"A VP has to be voted on the floor by the delegates."

You really are not this misinformed are you?

or..maybe I am wrong and you can provide a link that makes this comment credible...

"harlequin speech of suicide, demanding instantaneous lobotomy"

by nogo postal on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:40:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

This diarist is allergic to facts: (2.00 / 5)

Regarding her position on abortion, Sebelius describes herself as personally pro-life, but opposed to efforts to eliminate or reduce abortions primarily by criminalizing abortion procedures.[29] Sebelius' office states that abortions have declined 8.5 percent during her tenure as governor.[30] According to the Kansas Department of Health and Environment statistics, the number of induced abortions in Kansas declined by 1,568, or 12.6 percent, from 2001 to 2007, the year of the most recently available statistics.[31] Her administration attributes the decline to health care reforms that Sebelius initiated, including "adoption incentives, extended health services for pregnant women..., sex education and... a variety of support services for families."[32] Nationally, the number of abortions declined approximately 7.6 percent from 2000 to 2005, the year of the most recently available and reliable U.S. statistics.[33]

Sebelius has been endorsed by Planned Parenthood and they have conducted fundraising activity on her behalf.[34] Sebelius vetoed abortion legislation in Kansas in 2003, 2005, 2006, and again in 2008.

On April 21, 2008, Sebelius vetoed House Substitute for Senate Bill 389, titled the Comprehensive Abortion Reform Act by its sponsors. Proponents of the bill claimed the legislation would strengthen late-term abortion laws and prevent "coerced abortions," particularly with respect to minors. The Kansas City Star reported that HS SB 389 would have required the State of Kansas to collect patient diagnostic information providing detailed medical justification for late-term abortions, and would have also permitted litigants to sue abortion providers if they thought that a relative of theirs was planning a late-term abortion in violation of Kansas law.[35] Sebelius objected to the constitutionality, efficacy and morality of the proposed legislation. She wrote, "The United States Supreme Court decisions make clear that any law regulating abortion must contain exceptions for pregnancies which endanger the woman's life or health. However, SB 389 allows a variety of individuals to seek a court order preventing a woman from obtaining an abortion, even where it may be necessary to save her life. I am concerned that the bill is unconstitutional or even worse, endangers the lives of women." In addition, she expressed concern that the bill would "likely encourage extensive litigation" and that it "unnecessarily jeopardizes the privacy of Kansas women's confidential medical records."[32]

Kansas City Archbishop Joseph Naumann has stated that Sebelius has a long record of supporting and advocating for legalized abortion and that her public stances have "grave spiritual and moral consequences." Naumann also asked that she no longer receive Holy Communion. Naumann criticized Sebelius for vetoing HS SB 389.[36]

Some members of the Catholic media object to the Archbishop's request that Sebelius not take communion.[37] [38]

In September 2005, Sebelius donated a reception to be held at Cedar Crest, the official residence of the Governor, to an auction benefiting the Greater Kansas City Women's Political Caucus, a group that endorses only pro-choice candidates.[39] At the auction, the manager of a Wichita clinic that specializes in late-term abortions, physician George Tiller, bid and won the gubernatorial reception. Tiller redeemed the prize and he and members of his staff dined with Sebelius at her home on April 7, 2007.[40] [41]

by Geekesque on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:31:11 PM EST

Re: This diarist is allergic to facts: (2.00 / 1)

Excellent stuff, Geekesque. The more I look at her, the more I like her. I know she's a bit moderate, but she is very good on some key issues. She's solid on unions and good on the environment. She's better on choice (incrementally) than Kaine and more experienced.

Obama has enough charisma for both of them. Her soldiness is actually a good balance.

by TomP on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:43:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No really, Sebelius CANNOT be VP (this is not (2.00 / 4)

Look--and I'm not saying I buy this line of argumentation personally, but it's one that will catch on, especally with the media. But the whole "she's a woman, the Hillary supporters will be angry and think she's just a replacement" will be the prevailing line of thought, get everyone fired up, etc, etc.

Do I think that's the truth? No. Sebelius is plenty qualified for the spot, although I think it would be intellectually dishonest to say she's as qualified as Hillary is.

I just think it's a fight that the Obama campaign can avoid, by not selecting her. Plus, I can't see her getting Kansas blue, or helping with neighboring states. And the points about her being terribly uncharistmatic are completley valid. She's just not the right choice at this time.

Hillary supporter for Barack Obama in 2008

by zcflint05 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:32:22 PM EST

There is no perfect VP nominee, (2.00 / 3)

with Gore and Warner out of the running.

by Geekesque on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:37:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

differently charismatic (none / 0)

... i'd comapre her to LBJ, but that would do both of them a disservice, as she does the same thing totally differently.

I think she is more qualified, on the basis that she has fewer obligations.

but a dem gov. in kansas is hard to find.

yo mir kennen

by RisingTide on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:37:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I don't think Sebelius would be a disaster (none / 0)

Obama would probably win with whoever he picks,unless its reallly out there, like Venneman. I don't really have anything against her, but I dont' think she ads very much to the ticket.

by Mayor McCheese on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:35:05 PM EST

Obakasama! TURN NEBRASKA PURPLE! (1.00 / 1)

or get the FUCK out of our fucking way.

yo mir kennen

by RisingTide on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:35:38 PM EST

the hell was that for? (none / 0)

poblano thinks we've got a shot at that one congressional district (in omaha i think)

yo mir kennen

by RisingTide on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:39:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obakasama! TURN NEBRASKA PURPLE! (none / 0)

Purple?

Son, it's blue all the way.

Check out this book, it will give you the framing to imagine the country as all blue.

As much as that would make the deadenders head spin (I include DLC'ers who trashed the 2006 50 state strategy back then) it was possible by Regan in the 80's.

Can someone PLEASE tell me why the Democrats are afraid of a Blue country.

I doubt the movie actor Ronald Regan was scared one bit.

Why are Democrats SOOOOOOOOO afraid of the word Landslide? Why are we afraid to win?

(not directed at Rising Tide, to everyone)

by DemsLandslide2008 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:39:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

we'll get it blue... eventually (none / 0)

but this year, I'm pullin for purple!

(also because i like the idea of representation by congressional districts)

yo mir kennen

by RisingTide on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 10:25:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Sexism (none / 0)

Sexism is back on MYDD!

by DemsLandslide2008 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:36:37 PM EST

Alright, in order... (2.00 / 1)

1. "Constituency" of VP nominees is largely a myth. I can't think of a ticket where the VP nominee made or broke the election. We were okay with Quayle, after all, and he was dumber than a bag of hammers compared to Sebelius.

2. Being a 2 term state governor is big time politics. Period, full stop.

3. You're basing your belief on one speech. That's idiotic. If Obama had made one good speech in 2004 and then done nothing else, he'd be a poor candidate; similarly, one less-than-inspired speech by Sebelius doesn't counteract the good work she's done elsewhere.

4. Luckily, I already answered this with your bullshit constituency "problem" in #1.

5. Being that she is not a known name or entity, the headline would be "a black and a woman." That does not sound good, considering how hard a time Obama may have because of his color, and how hard a time he has ahead. Of course, if he had a name brand woman everyone knows, it would be OK as it would be "Obama and (a woman everyone knows)." Sebelius is pretty unknown right now, and would be in the former camp.

A woman everyone knows, eh? OBAMA/COURIC '08! Brilliant idea!

6. I can't believe how sexist you either are, or believe the rest of the country to be (and are too cowardly to stand against). How quick you are to throw away all of Hillary Clinton's phoenominal achievements in breaking down barriers.

In summary, you need a hug. Go get one. Pay if necessary; no price is too high for emotional security.

The pebbles have voted and the avalanche has begun.

President-Elect "That One"

by Dracomicron on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:37:27 PM EST

OBAMA/OPRAH '08 (none / 0)

huh?

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:39:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Oooh... (none / 0)

A bold choice, I confess it!

The pebbles have voted and the avalanche has begun.

President-Elect "That One"

by Dracomicron on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:54:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

LBJ made JFK (none / 0)

and delivered the south for Kennedy, who was having problems there due to his catholicism, enabling Kennedy to edge out Richard Nixonby a pop vote percentage of .2%. Bush Sr. added moderatism to Reagan's ticket, when in 1980, many perceived him as too conservative, which is why the race was so close until the bitter end. Carter played very well in the northeast in 1976, losing ME and CT by small margins even in their GOP heyday, and the then-GOP Vermont and New Hampshire. He won every northeast state north of West Virginia in 1976, and Bush I from Connecticut saw to it that Carter lost the Northeast. Bush Sr. also helped Reagan in the south, being "from Texas" as the south was actually Carter's best region in 1980. Just look at this map.

Sebelius hasn't even served out her second term. Number of terms don't matter alone. A term could be two years in some places. It is years that matter. Hillary has 30 involved in big time politics, Sebelius 5.

And when I said "a woman everyone knows," I meant a political contender. Don't be dumb with me. Hillary broke many barriers, but may not have done so with miscegenation. Obama and Sebelius, a political unknown woman would bring miscegenation images up.

by Lakrosse on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:49:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Too smart for me (none / 0)

And when I said "a woman everyone knows," I meant a political contender.

OBAMA/RICE '08!

The pebbles have voted and the avalanche has begun.

President-Elect "That One"

by Dracomicron on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:57:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Actually (none / 0)

Sebelius has over 20 years of public service since being elected to the Kansas Legislature in 1986. She was elected State Insurance Commissioner in 1994, and served in that role for 8 years until being elected Governor.

She did not just crawl out of the rock in 2002.

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:59:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

state legislature is mickey mouse (none / 0)

brick in the wall stuff as is insurance commissioner. Being on the Watergate hearing gave can give one an insight into the government, being First Lady of a state who did the things like reform education on her own alongside the governor, being first lady of the US for 8 years attempting to fight the insurance companies to reform health care for all Americans of all states, and then being a Senator for longer than Sebelius and being on the armed serviced committee is a much better example of experience.

by Lakrosse on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 06:04:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

oh please (none / 0)

being married to a politician is not more experience to actually being one. My God, you guys will do ANYTHING to undermine ANYONE who is not Hillary Clinton.

Enough...She will not be the running mate and we'll have to win without you...get over it, Hillary has.

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 06:06:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Actually (2.00 / 1)

But the point is no one, or almost no one knows this. And KS legislature and insurance commissioner isn't going to impress anyone, no matter how admirable her service may have been.

by Mayor McCheese on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 06:21:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

First Lady (none / 0)

doesn't impress me either. Does that make Laura Bush qualified to run for President too? I don't think so.

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 06:35:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Thank you for trolling (1.00 / 1)

This site is dead broke.

We were told we would get upgrades, and then crickets (in business world that usually means no money)

so please keep the sexist troll diaries rolling.

You have done a great job the last 3 months.

How is alegre doing, is she still hiding in her bathroom with the lights off?

by DemsLandslide2008 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:40:44 PM EST

Re: Thank you for trolling (none / 0)

So does Lakrosse post on NoQuarter or Alegre's site?

I forgot which one, funny as only Catfish2 recced this, one of the lamest trolls on this site.

by DemsLandslide2008 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:42:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Damn, I was just about to post THIS Diary!!!! (none / 0)

Damn, you upstaged my next diary which was going to be titled:

"NO, really REALLY "Honest to GOD" Sebeluis can no way EVER even be considered by any stretch of the imagination or any circumstances lest the universe collapes into a black hole to be the VP."

Oh well, back to my next sterling gem of a diary:

"Why Obama is really Joe Stalin, not Hitler!!"

Our long national nightmare is over...in 17 days!

by WashStateBlue on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:41:04 PM EST

Re: No really, (2.00 / 1)

Wow. I'm glad to know that you think so very little of Governor Sebelius and her accomplishments. Apparently the only way for a woman to be a viable national political figure is for her to marry another viable national political figure.

And we're the sexists?

by Reaper0Bot0 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:43:52 PM EST

Re: No really, (2.00 / 1)

Except that Hillary didn't marry a nationally viable national political figure. She married a young law student from Arkansas named Bill Clinton.

by Mayor McCheese on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:51:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

she and Bill worked from the ground up (none / 0)

to build their political machine. Sebelius already had hers by being the daughter of a politician and related to another one.

by Lakrosse on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:55:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No really, (none / 0)

You are using a sexist line of reasoning here. You are claiming that Clinton married her way into power, which is patently untrue.

by Mayor McCheese on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 06:00:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No really, (2.00 / 1)

No, that wasn't my point. With all due respect to Senator Clinton (whom I do not particularly like, but I honestly do respect) the difference between her and someone like Kathleen Sebelius is who Hillary Clinton married.

They are both fantastic politicians, great Democrats, and great Americans. Either one would be absolutely great on the ticket. The only reason that Senator Clinton has as high of a profile as she does is the fact that she has the last name "Clinton."

She isn't worth two Sebelius' or anything like that. They're both great, though they have different strengths and weaknesses.

I'm sick of seeing people denigrate Governor Sebelius because she isn't Hillary Clinton.

by Reaper0Bot0 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 06:49:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No really, (none / 0)

Who's deingrating her? I just dont' think she's a great VP choice and that there are better candidates. I would glady vote for her as VP if that's who Obama picked, but as I have said before, we can do better. Is no dissent on Sebelius allowed?

by Mayor McCheese on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 10:16:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

No experience? (2.00 / 1)

She busted a 1.1 billion dollar deficit her first year in office, without raising taxes or cutting education. What was that, luck? Time has named her one of the five best governors in America.

You can't just rattle off "only 2 years more experience blah blah" while dismissing the meaning of those years. Governor >>>> Senator, as far as "head of state" experience. Show me the billion dollar deficit Hillary OR Obama fixed.

by Neef on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 05:47:04 PM EST

My Obama-supporting family gets it (2.00 / 1)

they are very unsure that he'll win the election. Most of the commenters here are drunk on KoolAide. They can't comprehend why he should pick Hillary, or why it would make a difference.

by catfish2 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 06:00:20 PM EST

Re: My Obama-supporting family gets it (none / 0)

Most of the commenters here have been following the polls and projections.

The reason I don't want Clinton as Obama's VP, is because I actually want him to get to be president.

You want him to lose, and therefore you want him to choose a VP (like Clinton) that publicly stated he's not passed the CiC threshold.

It's as simple as that. You want the Republicans to repeat ad infinitum the clip of Clinton bashing Obama and comparing him unfavourably to McCain.

And then you'll blame Obama for the defeat, of course. If Obama picks Clinton, Obama loses -- Obama/Clinton is the unwinnable ticket.

Which explains perfectly your attitude. Do you really think anyone here believes you want Obama to win?

by Aris Katsaris2 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 06:38:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

If he picked Clinton, I'd consider voting for him. (2.00 / 1)

I would vote for him because I couldn't vote against Hillary.

I know that bothers you but I really am a Democrat. And I'm not even a racist.

by catfish2 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 06:55:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: If he picked Clinton, I'd consider voting for (2.00 / 1)

"Couldn't vote against Hillary" just strikes me as a bit cult of personality, especially from someone who spends a lot of time talking about Obama voters and "Kool-aide".

by Cincinnatus on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 06:58:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I don't follow her on everything (2.00 / 1)

she told me to enthusiastically support Obama. No can do. I might vote for him, but that's it.

by catfish2 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 07:24:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Didn't say you followed her on everything (none / 0)

Just said that maybe if you're gonna be insulting others for being in your eyes too enthusiastically devoted to a single candidate then maybe you should be taking a good look at yourself as well.

by Cincinnatus on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 07:32:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Nobody says she's an empty suit (2.00 / 1)

she's got substance. So the cult thing won't be as strong, people are supporting her for a reason.

by catfish2 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 08:08:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Nobody says she's an empty suit (2.00 / 1)

Millions of people supported Hillary despite the crappy MSM coverage. I think the Obama followers want to push Hillary's supports to background, but it will play a real role in November.

by stefystef on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 08:24:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Nobody says she's an empty suit (none / 0)

The cult thing applies when people reject her requests and ignore her support of the nominee, and instead talk about what they "know" she really wants and about the conspiracy to silence her and steal her rightful nomination.

Doesn't matter what you believe her qualifications are. She condeded the nomination, and has thrown her support behind Obama. Those pretending that she can be forced onto the ticket, that she can still get the nomination, or that she should wait until 2012 are supporting a fabricated image of Hillary Clinton they constructed during the primary and refuse to let go. They're not dealing with a real person anymore. That's why it's bordering on cultish at this point.

Although, IMO, it's just the delusions of a minority of bloggers who are addicted to the conflicts of the primary and want to continue in the same vein.

"This victory alone is not the change we seek -- it is only the chance for us to make that change." -- Nov. 4, 2008

by BobzCat on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 12:34:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Nobody says she's an empty suit (none / 0)

So your argument is "it's okay when I do it, because my person actually IS that awesome." Can you maybe see why that isn't such a strong argument?

by Cincinnatus on Fri Aug 01, 2008 at 12:14:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I don't follow her on everything (2.00 / 1)

You are not alone in your sentiments, catfish2.

by stefystef on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 08:21:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

If Obama loses, it's his fault. (2.00 / 2)

A few millenial cultists will blame Hillary. But it will be Obama's fault. Eventually, he has to take responsibility for something he does.

by catfish2 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 06:56:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: If Obama loses, it's his fault. (none / 0)

I think all the millenial cults went out with, you know, the millenium.

by Cincinnatus on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 07:02:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Actually, anyone can be VP (2.00 / 2)

Wow, this level of horror would normally be reserved for someone who brings huge negatives to the ticket. Your only argument (and much of it has been refuted by people before me) seems to be that she doesn't bring enough positives to the ticket. As for her and her record not being well known enough, that'll change quickly enough if she becomes the VP nominee. We certainly know a lot more about Obama himself since he became the nominee, and the GOP makes up half of it anyway, regardless of who we pick. So maybe simmer down a little bit.

by Cincinnatus on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 06:39:17 PM EST

What I see is the following (2.00 / 1)

What I see is the following: That the people (like catfish2) most anxious to see Obama lose are the people most anxious to see Clinton as Obama's VP.

The people most eager to see Obama win, don't want Clinton as Obama's VP.

I'll trust the people that actually want Obama to win to be the ones that make the suggestions that may actually help him attain victory.

by Aris Katsaris2 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 06:41:42 PM EST

Re: What I see is the following (2.00 / 1)

On a scale of one to ten for being a trail blazer I give Hill a 5.

I think it is an insult to include Evan Baye, as I give him a 2.

That said, I trust Obama's political machine to make the right choice.

In the end I don't believe VP is a deal closer for anyone.

I just hope he picks someone with a progressive agenda, not an electoral agenda.

I want someone more liberal than Barack.

Speaking of women, the best candidate of the smarter sex, would OBVIOUSLY be Darcey Burner

by DemsLandslide2008 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 06:56:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

54% have said that Sebelius is NOT (2.00 / 2)

a good choice for VP, so I guess that makes 54% of the diary readers "trolls."

I happen to believe that Sebelius would be a catastrophic choice for Obama. Why pick someone who is unknown except in party circles, has no international experience and isn't a compelling speaker? I just don't see what she would bring to the ticket.

I think he would do better for his ticket if he picked Biden or Bayh or Clinton. As for Kaine, I don't see what he brings to the ticket either, except maybe Virginia.

by Radiowalla on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 07:37:08 PM EST

Re: 54% have said that Sebelius is NOT (none / 0)

I abstained from the poll, since "good choice" is meaningless without comparison. I think Sebelius is an excellent choice compared to Clinton -- I think she's a bad choice compared to my personal favourite Clarke.

by Aris Katsaris2 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 07:48:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No really, Sebelius CANNOT be VP (this is not (none / 0)

Very good and thorough analysis.
I don't know anything about Seblius and I don't think there's enough time to get her name out there before November.

Also, I do not believe Obama will pick a woman as his running mate. He wants to be the candidate of "change" and a woman would take some of the wind out of his "audacity" sails.

And Michelle would not like playing second fiddle to another woman in the White House. That's how she rolls.

by stefystef on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 08:17:21 PM EST

Sebelius schemelius, what's the difference? (none / 0)

If Obama picks Sebelius, it's most likely because he really likes her and thinks it's the beginning of a beautiful friendship. (a la Casablanca)

She probably doesn't improve his election chances, except that it makes his base happy. But I guess he is more interested in one who is simpatico and maybe someone who won't steal the limelight away from him.

On this ticket there would be only one star, and this is the big plus for her. Anyway it's his game now and he gets to make the moves.

I'm a Clinton voter and I couldn't care less who he picks as his running mate. She lost so my interest in the election is not that big anymore.

I'm a dutiful Dem now. I will vote for the Dem. Or maybe since I live in California and Obama doesn't need my vote, I will vote my heart and write in Hillary.

by spoot on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:24:19 PM EST

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.