So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "up his leg," and...

On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 07:40:35 -0500, "Opus--Mark H. Bowen"
wrote:


wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:45:37 -0500, jeff miller
wrote:

wrote:

...apparently, he gets middle-aged white folks - yep, the guy-crush
types, too - all jungle-feverish, but why should anyone vote for him? I
mean this seriously and I'm not suggesting that folks shouldn't vote for
him (or should), but I'm asking for opinions as to what real (or
imagined) credentials/abilities folks feel, think, or believe Obama
possesses that makes him suited for POTUS.

TC,
R

...youth, intelligence, tolerance, gifted, persuasive, redemptive,
inspiring, unifying, empowering, thoughtful/insightful, problem-solving
skills, hope, hope, hope, symbolic power, listens, collaborative,
notbush, nothillaryclinton, notmccain, respect for balance of powers in
federal system, adapts and adjusts effectively, small government/big
government experience in elected office, understands/recognizes racial
and socioeconomic problems from a unique perspective, not a washington
dc insider...there's more, but i suspect these will be sufficient for
your critique and counterpoints.

jeff

Unless you know him a whole lot better than you have let on, only two
(possibly three) of the above (the "not(whomever)" obvious items
excluded) items are seemingly within your range of knowledge: his being
persuasive and inspiring (and possibly "hope," depending on who you
intend to mean is doing the hoping). Fine qualities, I suppose, if
properly directed, but IAC, they are qualities that speak more to you,
the persuaded and inspired, than he, the persuasive and inspiring. IOW,
from reports contemporaneous, Hitler and Gandhi were called both...at
least by those they persuaded and inspired...and oh, BTW, did you simply
forget to add "objective" to your list, or did you not think him such?

IAC, I still think he would do well as McCain's veep, and if nothing
else, it'd keep his dream alive. Given the overall situation _today_,
McCain's the next POTUS, and really, McCain doesn't have a clear running
mate. If Obama REALLY didn't want red or blue states, only united
states, one might think he'd be all over such an arrangement...

TC,
R

And the last time that happened was around 1825-1829, I believe. And that
was a Democratic President with a Republican VP-- John Quincy Adams and John
Calhoun.

This came about, if memory serves me correctly--which it may not, when the
VP was chosen as the runner-up in votes tallied for President. That being
changed with the ratification of the 12th Amendment to the Constitutions.

So, you might want to think in terms of what is likely to happen. Not likely
that either a Dem. or a Repub. would chose a VP from the eopposition party;
however, if such an event were to come to fruition, it is more likely that
Obama would chose McCain as his running mate--historically that is.

Er, no. Taking your memory as having served you correctly, at least for
the purposes of your own premise, no candidate has ever _chosen_ a
cross-aisle running mate, and so, neither McCain or Obama could be "more
likely" to do so based on historic precedent.

But your exercise does bring up another facet of Obama's "dilemma" - who
is he gonna get to be his running mate? Hillary? I'd guess that he
isn't THAT naive, but I'd guess she might accept if asked. Was the
choice of running mate what got him Teddy's support? I have no doubt
whatsoever that Teddy extracted _something_, even a list of somethings,
and if it was that, Obama's screwed.

And whomever Obama gets, what are McCain's options? While he is a bit
more well-placed to pick who _he_ wants, who would he want? Romney?
Naw. Huckabee? Hardly. Rudy? Maybe, but do either of them want him
attempting to play second-string? But Obama, at least in general terms
(which is all anyone has to go on at this point), seems to be close (or
at least close enough) in politics and temperament. I think most would
agree that such a pairing, given the field as it appears today, would
sweep into the WH with a mandate-level vote and they would be the only
possible pairing that could do so. And mandate-level votes are about
the only way things get changed - 50.01% versus 49.99% don't get it
done...

OTOH, do I think it's gonna happen? No, not really, at least not enough
to bet big on it, but maybe they'll see the light...

TC,
R

op