Judd Gregg is a conservative Republican -- particularly on budget matters. If he disagrees with Obama on certain policies, and resigns in protest, it would be very, very damaging politically for Obama (although not as damaging as if Hillary Clinton, James Jones, or Bob Gates resigned in protest). For that matter, is Judd Gregg even willing to enforce an Obama administration's policies? Those are questions that must be answered.
What kind of seniority does Norm Coleman want to give the people of MN? If Franken is seated with the rest of his class tomorrow, he will rank 97 of 100. Does Norm Coleman want to punish MN because MN punished him?
This isn't about Sarah Palin. It's fundamentally about John McCain. John McCain chose Sarah Palin, and John McCain is the one running for President. That John McCain would go with his gut and choose someone who he felt did not qualify for President demonstrates that McCain got caught up in the heat of the moment, and made a rash decision -- the same way George Bush got us into Iraq.
Imagine, if you would, at the stadium in Denver, that the film of the idealized memories of Robert and John Kennedy fills the screen, and then comes Ted Kennedy slowly walking to the microphone, and says, "The torch has been passed to a new generation of Americans. I give you the senator from Illinois."
... who want to stake out a political career themselves, are going risk their political careers, and go on record against the party's nominee? Supes comprise of 20% of the delegates.
Hillary was never going to get 45-48% of the delegates. She knew that. As a superdelegate, she didn't want to go on record voting against the party's nominee. That's why she never wanted a roll-call vote in the first place.
Do you really believe that Hillary Clinton and other superdelegates, all who are trying to carve out a political future themselves, want to go on record not supporting the party's nominee? Superdelegates comprise of 20% of the delegates, so it's hard to see how the roll-call vote is close.
As a candidate, do you really want -- every time you have an idea -- your VP nominee and his/her ex-President spouse telling you all the time: "I have a better idea, and what would you know? Last time I checked -- you've never won a Presidential election. Why am I always one step ahead of you."
This is what happened when Kerry picked Edwards. The constant disagreements in the Kerry/Edwards camp lead to a muddled message.
A good President is able to dominate the agenda. The Republicans -- bad as their ideas were in the 90s -- were setting the agenda, and forcing Bill Clinton and Democrats to respond using a negative power -- the veto pen and more than a third of either house in Congress.
If John Kerry's pick of John Edwards taught us anything, it's that you don't want a VP pick who thinks they always have a better idea than the nominee. That just leads to constant infighting and a muddled message. Evan Bayh certainly doesn't have this sort of outsized ego.
Another big reason: Evan Bayh is cautious and loyal. Being one of Hillary's few congressional supporters willing to represent Hillary on TV even during her darkest days, Bayh certainly was loyal to Hillary Clinton. Bayh is certainly willing to make a fool of himself in order to elevate the nominee. That's not something you find in very many VP picks.
Ultimately, my preference is Kaine -- who would underscore Obama's message that the Democratic party is constantly innovating and adapting to new realities while the Republicans, by nominating John McCain are stuck in the past. Kaine could truly mark the Kennedy torch being passed to a new generation of Americans, which is what makes Obama's candidacy so unique.