VA needs him and the senate needs all the dems it can get.
Plus, I don't really see Webb as a "back seat" kind of dude.
Full Disclosure: He's one of my senators so I have an interest in keeping VA blue.
Gozer, I agree.
but the talk persists out there. and there are certainly up-sides to his being on the ticket.
He "was" a republican..... REAGAN republican. Cancels out everything else. He also packs heat in the congress and "didn't know" you can't do that. gah.
No.
Other than that I like him for the war attack dog squad.
Lots of stuff to like but his past on women in the military etc, dating from the seventies is, shall we say, rather DISTURBING.
Like Gozer said, Webb's too idiosyncratic for VP. Obama wants a team player, someone who won't bring drama, and talented as Webb is, that's not him.
We need every single senator in the Senate to crack that 60 seat majority, especially since Lieberman's getting more obnoxious by the minute.
More than disturbing. And no, nobody who was a Republican 20 minutes ago (or, for that matter, right now, Chuck Hagel).
Loose cannon: good as Senatorial attack dog; really lousy on the stump, especially THIS time around.
And did I mention the Republican thing?
Good on paper, but the chemistry isn't right as Gozer noted and there are a lot of downsides.
I think the mistake with the idea of putting Webb or Clark on the ticket is that it validates the baseline Republican criticism that Democrats can't be trusted on defense, in a year when the Democratic candidate was the only one who saw what a military disaster Iraq would become. This year, with this candidate, defense is one of our strengths. Don't run from it.
Would Clark or Webb bring in any voters who disagree with Obama about Iraq or the war against al Qaeda? I don't think so, and I'm positive it wouldn't be enough to overcome the losses from Webb's old less-than-enlightened views on women.
And as Gozer alluded to, this could cost us the seat in Virginia. Kaine would appoint a Dem to take Webb's place, but is there any Dem in Virginia aside from Kaine who could beat George Allen if he decided to run again?
Not enough upside to make it worth the problems and losses it would bring.
OK. Let's clue in a little bit, before we subject Webb or anybody else to ideological purity tests. I know a whole heck of a lot of former Republicans, who are now liberal bomb throwers. Hell, I'm one of them.
Changes of heart CAN happen. Sometimes people who start one way, experience things in their lives that can open their eyes, and make them realize they've been playing for the wrong team, so to speak.
Furthermore, saying you are a former Republican is a sign that you've remained sane at this point.
I do think Webb has some things he would have to address. Certainly some of the fiction he's written, and some of the things he's said or written in the past is going to raise some questions. I'm sure he'd have to give Obama comfort that he can answer those challenges, and show that he has changed. FYI, he faced these questions in his recent Senate race, so I suspect he'll be ready for them.
I think Webb would provide Obama with the same qualities as Wesley Clark, an attack dog who could know McCain down several pegs as a military veteran/war hero.
However, I do think he has more baggage.
Pros:
1. Military veteran, could balance one of Obama's perceived weaknesses.
2. Has not been in the Senate very long, and would fit in with Obama's message of change.
3. Could serve as an attack dog vs. McCain on veteran's issues/military issues.
4. Would immediately put Virginia in play, and make it a likely Dem pickup in November.
Cons:
1. Limited Campaigning Experience.
2. Open questions regarding some written and oral statements from his past, particularly regarding gender issues.
3. Not particularly great on the stump. Won his seat primarily because his opponent (George Allen) imploded on YouTube.
Truthfully, the former Republican thing, isn't going to matter to the general electorate, or independents. In fact, it could be a plus.
Anyway, that's how I see it. YMMV.
I think Wesley Clark brings the same positives, but has fewer negatives.
Webb is way too valuable in the Senate, and he's not a suckup baby-kisser which, let's face it, the office of VP still is. Oh, he'd do the attack-dog stuff all right, but then once they'd won ... what?
No, this guy needs to stay in the Senate, fighting for veterans and generally being a pain in the ass to Texas Republicans. If anyone knows how to sell a "fuck Enron" platform, it's Webb.
I think Stickler's right. Let's leave the democrats who are in office in the house and Senate, and who are clearly pissed about what bush has done, in place.
There are some good choices among the governors, and among other people, too.
Also, I hate to count too many chickens, but I happen to think that Obama is going to pull so far ahead of McCain that he could pick a hobby-horse as veep, and still win.
I hasten to add:
Except, a hobby-horse named Hillary.
THAT horse would be pulling in the other direction, in the general.
As she did so much of, in the primaries.
Webb has more baggage than a Pullman Porter, and he's holding some valuable Senatorial real estate.
Also, my boyfriend's last name is spelled "Rollins," not "Rawlins."
That is all.
I've liked Webb's language and actions. He strikes me as working class, which is extremely rare in the elite air of Congress. But as VP? Not so much. Here's why:
(1) The conservative infiltration of our public discourse and ways of thinking -- the ways they are STILL framing the conversation -- relies, in a large part, on worship of masculinity, a made-up ossified idea of what being male means. Masculinity pumped into leadership has brought us to the brink of a police state. I want NO MORE NATIONAL LEADERS who have a military background, no matter how competent. We need someone who approaches issues completely outside that box. And while Obama and Hillary have both adopted hawkish poses to prove they, too, can play in the jockstrap Olympics, their backgrounds (including being non-military) keep them from being entrenched in those values. Which is a plus if we want to find a way to be in the world without resorting to imperialism.
(2) We do need Webb where he is, doing what he's doing.
(3) And yeah, I too believe in profound change/redemption. I have many friends who are recovering alcoholics, for instance, or former abusers. So having been a Reagan Republican does not cast you from the Promised Land. On the other hand: If I have a choice between a leader who was NEVER taken in by that load of swill vs. one who did spend time supporting the destruction of American values, at this stage in the game, I want the former. As a leader, I repeat. One of my big reservations about Obama is his appeasatory language about "reaching across the aisle". Bush said that, too. Republicans don't have the same vocabulary or logic system that progressives do, and compromise is not currently possible with them. I want a leader who doesn't think he has to try.
(4) I want a VP who is to the left of Obama. It's time for real liberals to re-enter the national picture: We should never have ceded the word. Obama is moderate on a good day, usually to the right of center.
what maggie sed.
although i don't discount someone for military experience the key is what they learn from that experience.
you can come from the military with things like nobility, honor, dignity, and a firm sense of right and good.
or, you can come out an authoritarian dickhead.
personally, i think webb is a little of both.
his loose cannon, while it can be a valuable calibre, it is also dangerous to have on deck when the storm comes.
i like webb. he resigned on principle when he was reagan's secnav. that was something very rare in republican circles.
he's a good senator, let him keep slugging away there.
I agree that Wesley Clark gives you the same upside as Webb, without as much of the baggage.
It is also less than certain that the Dems hold on to Webb's Senate seat, if he became VP.
Re. Clark vs. Webb, Clark has one additional advantage over Webb, in terms of what he could do after being elected.
Wesley Clark, it should be remembered, was NATO Supreme Commander at one time. You don't get that job, which effectively places him at the head of nearly two dozen national armies/navies, etc, without a whole lot of diplomatic skill.
Acting in that role isn't too different from herding cats. I could very easily see Clark as a roving ambassador for a while after an election win. A lot of people within the European Community already know him or know of him, and he, alongside Obama, could repair a lot of the damage to our relationship with Europe rather quickly. It's a role he would be ideal for.
webb is needed right where he is
Too fucking conservative on everything but the war.
Obama-Webb '08? Your thoughts?
Look out below.
"I think Wesley Clark brings the same positives, but has fewer negatives." Marshall
"I could very easily see Clark as a roving ambassador for a while after an election win. A lot of people within the European Community already know him or know of him, and he, alongside Obama, could repair a lot of the damage to our relationship with Europe rather quickly. It's a role he would be ideal for." Desert Hussein Rat
What Marshall and DHR said.
Commenting by HaloScan
