August 20, 2007

Doyle?

Stanley Fish reasons his way toward a short list of possible VP choices for Hillary Clinton (TimesSelect link):
So what she needs is a governor or former governor who can tip the balance in a fairly large state that could go either way, ideally someone from Ohio or Florida. If we go strictly by this criterion, Clinton’s man is Gov. Ted Strickland of Ohio; but he’s been in office for less than a year and his constituents probably wouldn’t be happy if he were to forsake them for a national stage. There’s no one in Florida, so it’s time to start looking elsewhere for someone who could help and won’t hurt. Mark Warner, the former governor of Virginia, was the political rage for a month or two and is regarded as a moderate; he could be repackaged by the right marketing campaign. He might even bring Virginia with him.

Gov. Mike Easley of North Carolina is a Democrat who has run ahead of his party in two elections. However, he is not well known outside the region and it is a question as to whether he could deliver his own state. It is doubtful that John Edwards could either. It is also unlikely that he will be asked, and even less likely that he would accept, although he would be smart to do so. (How else is he going to get another chance?)

Looking to the Midwest, Wisconsin has a democratic governor, Jim Doyle, a veteran (some might say shopworn) politician who was formerly an attorney general and has two adopted African American sons. He also has been caught accepting Green Bay Packer tickets, a minor infraction for which he was fined $300, but enough, perhaps to taint him. Evan Bayh is a popular senator from Indiana who was also a popular governor. He has tested the presidential waters before; and would know what he was in for.

And then there’s Bill Richardson, two-term governor of New Mexico, former congressman. former Ambassador to the United Nations, former Secretary of Energy, three quarters Mexican, but with a reassuringly Anglo-Saxon name. Sounds ideal, even though his state has only five electoral votes and he is an unpolished speaker....

So there’s the list – Warner, Bayh, Easley, Richardson, maybe Doyle. No one who sets the pulses racing, but no one, at least on the evidence so far, who would be a total mistake. The mistake would be if Senator Clinton decided to get creative and adventurous, but on the record there seems to be little danger of that.
Doyle?

IN THE COMMENTS: The subject of Bush and Gore debating comes up, and someone says "dumb beats weirdo." Somebody else perceives that as a rock-paper-scissors game and the search is on for what beats dumb but loses to weirdo.

LATER: John Stodder writes:
As the originator of this new rock-paper-scissors meme, I declare Original Mike's suggestion of "Boring" to be correct. So now we know how the world works:

Weirdo beats Boring
Boring beats Dumb
Dumb beats Weirdo


I think that accounts for pretty much every presidential election in U.S. history. You could look it up.

Also, this explains Hollywood, and perhaps the blogosphere.

50 comments:

hdhouse said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
hdhouse said...

Kinda for Richardson just because he seems to be the real deal in a lot of ways.

After President Woowoo and Darth Vadar the expectations of riviting oratory and consumate debating skills have pretty much been wiped clean off the landscape.

As an ad hominem observation, I was at a vol. fireman's fundraising picnic Saturday and really did overhear a political discussion the essence of which was if Hillary chose a male running mate "what kinda guy would choose to work for a woman"?...Now I'm not saying that this comment is even remotely typical but there just may be a percentage point or two who think this way....sadly but true.

ricpic said...

Why should we, the fuckees, care about how the fuckers are going to set up this go-round's con?

P. Rich said...

Easley - Nifong.

The only idiot they'll be able to run will be some passive, do-nothing unknown from Sticksville who won't mind being alternately ignored and screamed at for four years. Seriously. Would anyone with a brain capable of independent thought and some modicum of personal pride and integrity even consider being HR Clinton's other VP?

AllenS said...

"He also has been caught accepting Green Bay Packer tickets, a minor infraction for which he was fined $300, but enough, perhaps to taint him."

I'm not sure about the rest of the country, but anyone from Wisconsin who doesn't accept Green Bay Packer tickets, would look much worse.

Bruce Hayden said...

I think that it is Richardson. All the right qualifications, plus Hispanic. Five votes for NM is meager, but the state is swinging now, and the Dems lost it last time around.

Steven said...

I find it hard to believe that Clinton will ask anyone BUT Obama to be VP when she gets the nomination.

I wonder if Stanley Fish has ever met Doyle, or even seen him speak?

Roger said...

Steven: I agree with your assessment, but whats your take on Obama accepting the VP slot were it offered?

Cedarford said...

Since the days of Walter Mondale, lost in Carter's failed Presidency, the trend, except for "Skippy" Quayle, has been for VPs selected more for experience, some gravitas, than geographical balancing.
As the Presidents have learned that VP Office can be a powerful asset and as the only other nationally elected figure are all but absolutely immune to rabid partisans anger and subpoena attempts over their pulling some controversial strings, the Office has Transformed.

The selection has to start 1st and foremost with someone able to convince voters "This Person Could Step into the Presidency in an Emergency".

The second is if the VP selectee boosts the overall ticket with good synergy. Lieberman helped Gore that way, even though CT was a lock. The Breck Girl HURT Kerry by spotlighting how natural and good a liar and politician he was compared to the stiff and unnatural Kerry.

It would be nice if selection guaranteed the VP's home state, especially a critical big swing state - and that the VP was a well-regarded, popular governor with tons of creds with the Party Base. Alas, for Republican's cosmic-sized chagrin, unless that Governor's last name is Bush.

The Dem's best choice is Evan Bayh. 20 years Governor or Senator, barely in his 50s. Only a few controversial votes - like his rejection of Indiana homeboy John Robert's nomination.

Ralph Richardson would have been the choice on resume` before voters got a look at how unprepared, fumbling - dare we say, stupid?? - Richardson appears to be in debates or interviews..

Obama is out on his inexperience, despite being "such an articulate sorta black guy"...

Nor should people think that the VP of either Party has to come from some select list of present or past Presidential campaign failures from the Senate or from the Governor ranks.

It could be a general (hopefully a little less erratic than Wesley Clark and not one of the small coterie of retired Defeatists) to help overcome the Dems obvious national security weakness, it could be a past stellar Cabinet official like Robert Rubin...

Hopefully it will be someone with executive experience and tested problem-solving ability.

Romney, who I think will be there at the end, standing (Giuliani may implode on his big closet of skeletons and tough guy patina morphing into unlikeability) - has a big opportunity to shock and pick an unconventional VP.

From the Blue Dog Democrats, and craft a bipartisan ticket that will appeal to Independents.

Like Blanche Lincoln.
Like JOe Lieberman.
Like Evan Bayh if Hillary is forced by the Base to pick a minority or Lefty as her VP choice.

Hoosier Daddy said...

It is doubtful that John Edwards could either.

Well considering he couldn’t deliver his own state for Senator Botox in 2004, it goes without saying he’s not going to somehow deliver it for the Iron Maiden.

As a Hoosier, Bayh is indeed a moderate who would balance the ticket but Indiana is solidly red and I don’t think he’d ingratiate himself with his constituency being Hillary’s successor.

jane said...

"It could be a general (hopefully a little less erratic than Wesley Clark and not one of the small coterie of retired Defeatists) to help overcome the Dems obvious national security weakness"

I'm convinced that the two Arkansas Rhodes scholars Bill and Wes came to some mutual accommodation a few years ago. If Gen. Weasley Clark isn't the VP choice, he'll be Sec of State. Much depends on Obama's polled voter attraction, how close the race is in key states and whether the GOP can keep national security a paramount issue next year.

Maybe Obama will be mollified with the pre-offer of a Cab position. But Hollywood is so set on him as a "first," having already lived the thrill of a woman first Prez via TV and the movies.

froggyprager said...

I really like Richardson and think he is the best Dem in the field. I think his experience (foreign policy, energy) would help Clinton seem stronger.

One thing I like about Doyle is that he really does not seem interested in positioning himself for higher office. I have never seen him say anything about foreign policy issues and rarely gets into DC politics and doesn't try to be a media hog. He is not known outside of WI to anyone and I think WI will go Dem in the Presidential election without him. It won't be him.

reader_iam said...

When I saw the title to this post, my first fleeting thought was that you were summoning up one of your regular commenters for some reason.

Blew my mind there, for a minute.

I must need more exercise.

Theo Boehm said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
EcoliWiki Staff said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Jim Hu said...

rom reading Althouse over the years, I thought Doyle had more baggage than just the Packer tickets. Am I misremembering?

Ralph Richardson probably isn't eligible for veep, being British and dead since 1983. Probably would have been a better speaker than what we'll get from either party.

Perhaps watching Bill Richardson in Sunday's debate made you want to ralph?

previous deletion was me... too many gmail accounts...

Doyle said...

If called upon, I will serve.

George said...

TN Governor Bredesen....

popular with TN Republicans...

incredible background as an entrepreneur...

created huge health care company...

help carry state against Fred, not to mention the rest of the South.

AllenS said...

Doyle said...
If called upon, I will serve.

Can I have your Packer tickets?

Original Mike said...

Ann's archives would sink you, Doyle.

Hoosier Daddy said...

TN Governor Bredesen....

Very impressive guy from what I have read. He would almost seem like a shoe in if he was a candidate.

But rather than a solid moderate with a proven track record such as Bredesen, the dems put up the frontrunners of a former first lady and a freshman senator with no track record but who speaks real well.

Tully said...

"If called upon, I will serve."

As a punching bag, that being one of the designated roles of the VP choice. :-)

More seriously, I've mentioned Bredesen as a possibility elsewhere, though he has steadfastly insisted he doesn't want the job. Which could change in a heartbeat if someone actually offred it to him, of course.

Richardson's appeal (besides his depth of experience) is that his Hispanic heritage can carry weight far beyond New Mexico, providing some boost in key southern and western states.

Václav Patrik Šulik said...

General James L. Jones, USMC (ret'd)

Invisible Man said...

Cedarford,

I hate to let you know but Lieberman was one of the most disastrous VP picks ever. He, of course, brought zero electoral votes, he is maybe the only VP candidate other than Quayle to DECISIVELY lose a VP debate, added all of the energy to the campaign of McCain's gay sweaters and didn't even help with the one constituency that should have been a lock for him, Jewish voters. I know that people look at Al's decision not to use Clinton as the deathblow to his campaign, but for me, without Joementum, Al wins.

And, I'm not sure why Ann left Bill Nelson from Florida off of the list. Moderate and an astronaut with high approval levels in Florida, he might be able to secure the state for Hillary.

Cedarford said...

Jim Hu - Ralph Richardson probably isn't eligible for veep, being British and dead since 1983. Probably would have been a better speaker than what we'll get from either party.
Perhaps watching Bill Richardson in Sunday's debate made you want to ralph?


Ahhh, yah got me, Hu!

Just a memory fart, I'd actually looked up Richardson's bio a month or so ago and should have remembered his 1st name.

I actually started with high hopes for the Hispanic with the Golden resume` - then saw him eviscerate himself in all the media forums I saw him in as uncomfortable, slow-witted, ill-prepared, saying things that Obama would have been roasted for on "inexperience" like Richardsons pledge to have a one-month retreat back to the USA from Iraq so "families" could be "together again"(this years The Children! For the Children's sakes!!)- a military global repostioning that logisticians assert is a physical impossibility to achieve in only a month.

He had an awful 1-hour session with Russert in early July where he went past ill-prepared, To simply stupid.

I wondered after that if we had a golden resume` of a dullard who stuffed it based mainly on a lot of affirmative action plums tossed his way. In the Southeast, he hasn't exactly thrilled as Governor, either.

He talked himself into 3rd tier as a Presidential candidate. And unless the dude proves he has two brain hemispheres that work and fire in syncronicity - I can't see him as a VP sharp enough to step into the Presidency.

Hoosier and George - good mention of TN Governor Bredesen. I was thinking of someone down South or Midwest for Hillary and didn't think of Bredeson. He would be a good selection. I disagree about Thompson - running is 24/7/365 and Thmpson has (1)No fire in his belly; (2)Added 5-8 million to his "Law and Order" contract value with all the Presidential buzz; (3)Is a lazy bastard; (4)Has a trophy wife to saddle up; (5)Got some messy lobby biz involving him and his sons that might lower his Hollywood price tag if dragged out;(6)Rather enjoys having all sorts of people cheer him and smootch his ass as the man they think always has the right words and decisions on TV - so why ruin that with introducing the public to the Thompson "warts and all" reality??

Hoosier Daddy said...

I'm not sure why Ann left Bill Nelson from Florida off of the list. Moderate and an astronaut with high approval levels in Florida, he might be able to secure the state for Hillary.

Here's my question: Does a moderate bluedog democrat want to be so closely tied with HRC? I don't think Bayh for example would enjoy the same popularity being HRCs VP considering many Hoosiers see HRC as a closet socialist. I'm wondering if others look at it from that viewpoint as well. HRC may be a democrat but I don't think her core principles are in line with what a lot of traditional democrats have. Bayh, Bredeson et al are cut more from the Truman/JFK mold which I think are more at odds with the brand of Democrat that HRC is which is why those southern Dems keep voting GOP.

Susan said...

I hate to let you know but Lieberman was one of the most disastrous VP picks ever.

Plus his name enabled that humorous post-election sign "Sore Loserman".

John Stodder said...

What about the governor of Colorado. I know he's only a first-termer, but if there is a candidate out there who could lock it up for HRC, it's probably Gov. Ritter.

-- Former Catholic missionary in Zambia; gave up a fast-lane career to go there with his family.
-- Pro-life (but won't do anything about it)
-- Favors universal health care, pro-environment, but also regarded as pro-business and tough on crime
-- Track record of winning votes from Republican-leaning rural voters
-- Comes from a region that could go either way, but is starting to trend Democratic.

Is he ready to be President? Not necessarily, but he's as credible as Obama or Edwards, just based on experience. He puts a lot of GOP states back in play, meaning the Reep candidate would have to spread his resources around more thinly.

Ritter ought to be considered.

Cedarford said...

Invisible Man - Lieberman helped immunize Gore against the moral sleaze of the Clintonistas, which after 7 years of Dubya's blunders seems trivial - but was tremendously important back then. That was his main value. It worked. Lieberman was the signal that a more honest, ethical Gov't, though a gun-grabbing Gov't, was planned.

Bill Clinton might have won Florida and Arkansas to Gore, but with high danger that Clinton would alienate swing state voters.

Post-election analysis showed one huge factor was at work that according to voters surveyed, cost Gore Tennessee, Arkansas, Florida for sure - and likely New Hampshire. The Dems obsession with stripping away people's 2nd Amendment Rights as a solution for "crime".

That was Gore went hardcore anti-gun, and campaigned on that and other issues like he was a Beltway Boy trying to please the big money liberal donors on the Coasts and turning his back on the Midwest and South.

The election wouldn't have been close but for the Dem's last minute sneak hit that Dubya had a DWI conviction.

Lieberman BTW, did not lose against Cheney. The two had one of the best debates that highlighted both men's strengths. How fast people forget..The decisive debate losses were of "the genius" Noble Algore blowing it in each debate, then disclosure that "the genius" had lower grades at Yale than "Animal House" Bush and had failed out of Divinity school.

(If it is solace to Algore, then the "wise and great" Kerry ran. Kerry made Algore look good. )

Seven Machos said...

Bredesen wound be a stroke of genius. It's got to be him or Bayh.

Clintons are competent. This much we know.

kbo said...

Why not Vilseck??

SteveR said...

Richardson's got a good resume (actually great) and is a good politician, in a back room sort of way, but he's not a bright lights kind of guy. For one thing he sweats, which makes his weight seem more pronounced and he's not used to tough scrutiny. uhh! ummm? Doh!

Ed said...

How about Ed Rendell form PA? He never gets mentioned, but he seems to have the resume to be on the list. He also doesn't have a history of looking like an unprepared dolt on national TV.

How come no one, outside of PA, ever mentions him. PA could swing 22 electoral votes red next election, especially if HRC is on top of the ticket.

John Stodder said...

I think the memories of the last two campaigns are being jumbled. It was John Edwards who got smoked by Cheney, not Lieberman. And it was Gore who got smoked in the 2000 debates, not Lieberman. That's right, everybody: Skippy the Bush Kangaroo smoked Al Gore, three times, decisively. Don't give me this "mainstream media decided the outcome post-debate" nonsense. Gore looked like a total weirdo in all three debates, especially the one where he tried to look manly by standing close enough to Bush that he could have licked his ear. In the rock-paper-scissors of life, Dumb beats Weirdo every time.

Lieberman is not an exciting candidate, but it is truly a distortion of history, Daily-Kos-meets-1984 to blame Lieberman for Gore's loss. Bush might not have won the election, but Gore richly earned his defeat thanks to about 10 strategic and 50 tactical errors, of which none of them was Lieberman implicated.

Steven said...

whats your take on Obama accepting the VP slot were it offered?

I don't think he would take it, and I think he would be smart not to. While I can see Obama winning the general, I have a very hard time seeing HRC winning the general election.

Original Mike said...

JS said: "In the rock-paper-scissors of life, Dumb beats Weirdo every time."

Love it, but we need the 3rd state.

Smart beats Dumb, Dumb beats Weirdo, Weirdo beats Smart?

Needs work.

jane said...

I'm surprised nobody mentioned Christopher Walken. He could round out a Hillary ticket with abject honesty:

"Because if I don't know my lines, I really don't know what I'm doing."

"I try not to worry about things I can't do anything about."

and, "I don't need to be made to look evil. I can do that on my own."

John Stodder said...

I'm stumped. I'll be thinking all day about who beats Dumb but loses to Weirdo.

If I think of it, that's the makings of a best-selling book.

Der Hahn said...

Nerd, not Smart

Original Mike said...

Diffident?

Original Mike said...

Boring.

Boring beats Dumb, Dumb beats Weirdo, Weirdo beats Boring.

SteveR said...

OM: I thought of boring as well, but not sure. Tossed out dishonest.

Really hard to improve on "in the rock-paper-scissors of life, Dumb beats Weirdo every time" no matter how you complete the triad.

B said...

Doyle,

Good one. Was hoping you'd take advantage of this.

Revenant said...

The third state, from the perspective of the Libertarian Party, is Intellectual.

Libertarian intellectuals do an excellent job of demolishing the Dumb arguments of traditional liberals and conservatives. But within the party itself the intellectuals are totally unable to stand up to the Weird people who dominate the actual nomination process. The end result is that the invariably Weird Libertarian candidate gets beaten like a rented mule by whichever Dumb candidates he's facing from the major parties.

Tim said...

I'm with Dishonest, as in "Dishonest beats Dumb, Dumb beats Weirdo, Weirdo beats Dishonest."

As for VP, Obama is out. Richardson is in, for all kinds of obvious reasons. Bayh would be good, but wouldn't serve the Hillary! (as no self-respecting man would put up with that - ever notice how many men have leadership positions in the Hillary! campaign...?) Wesley Clark is even weirder than Kucinich - so no way the Hillary! asks him for that job, although he’d take it.

LagunaDave said...

What about Gephardt? I thought of him, and checked Wikipedia to see what he has done since leaving Congress. Turns out he has already endorsed Herself, and the international law firm he joined has already donated a cool $190K to her campaign.

He was not a governor, but he is relatively well thought of as what passes for a moderate in the Democratic party today (I mean, I wouldn't vote for the guy, but compare him to Pelosi...), and he's from Missouri, which is maybe not out of reach for the Dems, and would pretty much seal the election for them if they could carry it.

Surprised nobody has raised the point, but won't Hillary's VP pick be sort of the third in the chain of command, and hence maybe less important for her than for other candidates who aren't married to a former president?

As far as I'm concerned, Slick Willie is, and will always be, her running mate.

John Stodder said...

As the originator of this new rock-paper-scissors meme, I declare Original Mike's suggestion of "Boring" to be correct. So now we know how the world works:

Weirdo beats Boring
Boring beats Dumb
Dumb beats Weirdo

I think that accounts for pretty much every presidential election in U.S. history. You could look it up.

Also, this explains Hollywood, and perhaps the blogosphere.

Jimbo said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
downtownlad said...

Why did everyone ignore the most logical choice?

Jim Webb.

Trooper York said...

Because Spud Webb is more likely...Senator Webb is too independent for the Clintons...Corzine might have been good before the accident because he could bring the money and New Jersey (especially if Rudi is the nominee)...but I think Harry Reid has an outside shot...since he could balance the Mormon thing out if Romney is on the ticket and he knows how to take orders.